I’d like to learn to write well (see why here).
I’ve been told the most sensible thing to do when starting to learn the craft of writing is to pick one topic to write about.
People will look to you for the right answers !
The reality is that there is often no right, and I certainly only don’t feel like I have many absolute answers, so I’m going to choose another path.
I’m going to try to focus on explaining my process of coming to a directional view on something, with no particular topic area focus (for now), with an aim to show the logic behind a perspective, some discussion on that perspective, that it is only just one view and that if you read my sources you may or may not have the same opinion.
Neither is right or wrong.
My aim is to develop [1] an insight into one path of thinking on a topic, build an understanding that any definite conclusion is rarely ‘right’ and that any ultimate accuracy is mostly about time and iterating on that directional path, rather than satisfying any ego with a predictive conclusion.
This is all open for change, but for now I will start each future post with sequential, bulleted perspectives, then move onto a related essay, backed up by any of the key sources I’ve used.
A Perspective - My Understanding Now
I often read whole bunch of stuff, often on topics I don’t know much about. For example I start with something like the Dunning Kruger Effect
I get entrenched in content all around it, I start researching related topics, like say, other cognitive biases. I may start talking about it with friends.
This may all then sit in my sub conscious for a while. Then do some thinking on, say, how biases affects us all as we age and what anecdotes could there be to some of these biases or states of being
By now I am starting to form the basis of a very high level understanding.
Occasionally I may try to project or forecast a view on what the future may hold as it’s related to the topic.
And succumbing to a few other biases [2], I start testing parts of the thesis into conversations I have with people at that time. Often, no doubt, making them bored (“WHAT the hell is he rambling on about?”) or frustrated (“WHY the hell is he rambling on about this”)
My ‘conversation victims’ aren’t the only ones frustrated. I often start confusing myself, with sources, with sequencing of thoughts, and ultimately with my own understanding;
- The irony is, if you end up having some understanding and don’t ever expose
it to the world, is it the same as never having a perspective (hence this blog, I
guess)
- And now in the following Stephen Covey's fifth piece of advice in his book
Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, 'seek first to understand then to be
understood', I am attempting to rationalise, and now communicate, my path of
comprehension.
So, to solve this information death spiral, what I have occasionally done is write down my understand at that point in time. I started calling these a; Point in Time Point of View (‘PiTPoV’ [3] ) to help me manage my neural mesh and maintain a semblance of interactive sanity.
AND given I am keen to learn to write, I thought writing an essay on each PiTPoV would help me improve and explain my perspectives more fully, or at least discuss elements of them that need exploring.
That explanation will also include a list of the best sources I used to come up with that view, mostly as evidence of my sanity but also so that anyone can see my level of understanding, and possibly point me to others places to advance it further.
If you’re interested in where the Dunning Kruger research ended up, have a read of my next post.
The Essay - On Being Directionally Right
Clearly deep topic area knowledge is often critical to any ventures success.
Although, information breadth has often helped me with a more innovative and objective view on a given topic, and given that much of my entrepreneurial working life has been spent /trying/ to be ‘right’, and that having relevant information at the right time is a big part of trying to form a ‘right’ view.
But, I’ve come to realise in more recent times, that for the most part, being ‘right’ is a false idol.
I have made a career out of trying to be right, trying to predict which way I think an industry will go, what I think the companies in that industry will need to do (practically and strategically) in the future, how technology might be used to disrupt them, how others would react and then sometimes, if I get enough conviction, starting (or investing in) a company in the most strategically valuable spot. All with a view that at some point multiple parties will look to own that position, and buy my firm.
However, having been through that cycle many times now, I’ve come to understand that much of any success I’ve had has been more correlated to timing (of the market, of that startup being around at the right time and for the right amount time [4], and getting out at the right time) and possibly persistent hard work, than me being absolutely ‘right’.
It’s taken me a while to understand that targeted outcomes are increasingly probable if directional thinking is framed correctly upfront, rather that attempting to be definitive. That framing has allowed me, over time, a ‘place’ to put thoughts/feelings in a useful, (more) mature way.Professionally (and occasionally personally), I’ve benefited from having a point of view that provides room for change.
I’ve probably written over 100 business plans, and am yet to write one that has turned out to be right! That doesn’t mean I was directionally wrong, it just means that the exact business (and plan) I started out with (and its underlying drivers) is not the one that I exited. But what I have learnt is how to frame a direction so that the business has room to iterate quickly within those boundaries, and with market acceptance, be ‘more right’ at the right time.
So, in an attempt to leave my ego at the door, I’ve only recently felt that being ‘right’ was evolving into a process, context and an understanding. The more perspectives I have, the more understanding I have on a topic, the more likely I can have a view that is closer to ‘right’ for me - at that point in time in my (or a markets) life.
And while personally I am mostly accepting of things that are right (because they are right for me), from societies perspective, acceptance and being right are forces that are often misaligned by time [5].
In startup investing, I’ve experienced both sides of what Victor Hugo tells us; “Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come.” An idea that is right, and now accepted.
If you feel you are right, but the society doesn’t accept your view, that time gap and the number of iterations required before affirmation can be difficult to swallow….
Waiting for Acceptance Can Give you Ulcers
…In 1875 a German scientist, G Bottcher, found that the the primary cause of a stomach ulcer was the presence of a certain foreign bacteria (which came to be known as Helicobacter pylori).
Over the next 100 or so years scientists developed countless theories as to what caused ulcers, however the prevailing thesis for many years prior to 1987, were that gastric ulcers were thought to be mostly a psychosomatic affliction caused by stress, urban businessmen smoking too many ciggy’s and working long hours. Patients were treated with tranquillisers, anti-depressants, psychotherapy or antacids.
However in the early 1980’s, an Aussie gastroenterologist named Barry Marshall started doing clinical trials on his own patients and discovered all patients that had ulcers also had the bacteria H. Pylori present in their stomach. He found that he could cure 100% of patients treated with just antibiotics.
In 1983 he went on to present research papers to numerous conferences across Europe, but his papers were rejected. His findings deemed to prove a correlation between H. Pylori and ulcers (and stomach cancer), but thrown out as they didn’t prove ‘causation’.
Although that wasn’t the real reason for rejection.
You see, the pharmaceutical industry (selling $3 Billion worth of antacid drugs per year, like Zantac and Tagamet [6]) and the whole endoscopic industry weren’t feeling in a very accepting mood when they were told this recurring patient disorder was now curable by a dose of antibiotics [7]. Actually, at the time, 25% of a gastroenterologist’s business was coming from this recurring disease that they could never cure.
There was no real incentive for the industry to find a cure. Meanwhile very badly affected patients with bleeding ulcers were having their stomach removed because antacids weren’t working.
Barry knew antibiotics could kill the infection in a lab, but he needed hard evidence. More proof quickly. So he cultured a broth of organisms in his lab and drank it himself. The next morning he woke up vomiting, and after an endoscopy, found a stomach full of the H. pylori bacteria. He’d go on to cure himself with antibiotics by the weekend, but those results still weren’t enough incentive for the large biased Pharma firms to start clinical trials.
His results sat just as a ‘hypothesis’ for another 10 years, until 1993, when the US Food and Drug Administration saw the extent of the US peptic ulcer suffering and got Barry’s news out in the journals. In a huge win for stressed out, smoking businessmen everywhere, by 1996 antibiotics was the accepted treatment for stomach ulcers, and in 2005 Barry and fellow researcher, Robin Warren, were awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine.
So in society there can be a huge lag in time and many iterations between something that is right and finally accepted. This can be stark and evident when viewed with a scientific lenses as Barry can attest to, or more opaque when looking at a cultural ‘norm’ with something like ‘smoking’.
We have known for sometime that smoking causes cancer, that it’s in effect ’wrong’. However in most parts of the world it’s still a relatively accepted habit.
Although society often guides our views on things, and without moving into the ethical questions surrounding what's 'good or bad', generally as individuals we accept things that are right and don’t accept things that are wrong. Even though someone might smoke knowing it’s bad for them, they are accepting of the act of smoking and therefore by smoking themselves believe it’s right.
However, there are numerous subtleties here. For example, is our inaction actually acceptance and therefore right. During an investigation into bullying and harassment in the military, Lieutenant General David Morrison stated: “The standard you walk past is the standard you accept” [8].
Unfortunately, many individuals know sexual harassment and bullying is wrong, but often by inaction are they, in effect, accepting of it? Is being aware and able but not acting, actually acquiescence, and thereby acceptance?
This is a complex question.
Clearly I’m not accepting of harassment or bullying, not do I think they are right, but I’m aware of hundreds of ‘right’ causes and charities, for the ones I choose not to help am I accepting of that inequality that they are trying to solve? This is too broad a topic to discuss here, perhaps for another post.
What we do know, and as Barry Marshall can attest too, being right and unaccepted can actually be painful. In this case, for him and society.
Further, I’ve realised that in order to create an educated opinion we all require numerous perspectives to overcome [9] our various biases. For example, confirmation bias is rife and if we don’t search out diversity of content and sources (outside of our news feeds) we could easily end up with more narrow, rigid, cynical views.
Why?
Because, as we've just seen, being right is relative. Its relative to the data (how much, trust of sources, diversity, etc) we have on the topic, and to time.
For example, some people swear by the benefits of acupuncture, but for most people it is still less accepted. In this sense, saying acupuncture is right or wrong, good or bad, is relative to the individual and their experience, however if something is more commonly accepted than not, then society generally considers it to be ‘more right’.
Which leaves us with time as the key variable for change, opinions like mine can only be transient, meaning framing the thinking of ‘how can I be directionally right’ is really where value lies, either until society moves inline with my directional view OR until I gather information which alters my view in another direction.
From an individuals perspective, correctness and acceptability are much more highly correlated, and as a result require us to think what are the other key variables the could lead to society sharing the same view. In the business world that level of understanding will assist enormously in setting the right course for the business at that point in time.
If we assume there often no absolute right and we can’t completely control what is generally accepted, then all that remains is our understanding at a point in time. In our boardrooms, dinner tables and in our online socially connected world, a persons opinion is most often lazily framed for or against someone else’s view, without advancing anyones understanding on the topic.
And hence this blog.
The goal of my writings will be to aid my (and maybe your) understanding on a topic in the hope that I can hold an opinion loose enough we can all embrace any iterations of thought and feedback over time, with a view that inside our Negative Capability, our willingness to accept uncertainty, is where the answers that are both acceptable and right, coexist.
============================
[1] As much for me, as you….but I figure if I can satisfy my curiosity demons than others could get something out of it as well
[2] Most commonly, recency bias starts fighting with confirmation bias.
[3] A PiTPoV is a sequential set of evidence based points, where each point is, hopefully, independently correct but relates and expands on the previous point. These are often all bound by a common theme or thesis, leading to a final perspective.
[4] See Bill Gross Ted talk on timing (most important factor for start up success) [Bill Gross: The single biggest reason why start-ups succeed | TED Talk](https://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gross_the_single_biggest_reason_why_start_ups_succeed?utm_campaign=tedspread&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare)
[5] Misaligned by time and time related contextual factors like number of iterations, environmental/market events, etc . Hence why timing is key to a startups success
[6] In the US in the 1980’s, 2 to 4 percent of the population had Tagamet tablets in their pocket
[7] Marshall said ......“Later, scientists induced ulcers in rats by putting them in straitjackets and dropping them in ice water. Then they found they could protect the rats from these stress-based ulcers by giving them antacids. They made the connection between ulcers, stress, and acid without any proper double-blind studies, but it fit in with what everybody thought.”
[8] Actually, David has admitted to poaching the quote from Australian Governor General David Hurley
[9] ‘Overcome’ is not the right word. In contrary to his book Thinking Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahnamen has recently come out to say that ‘overcoming’ many biases is exceptionally hard, if not impossible. But at the very least I mean to manage my own perception of trying to overcoming my biases :)
============================
Sources I've Read for this Post
Bill Gross: The single biggest reason why start-ups succeed | TED Talk
https://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gross_the_single_biggest_reason_why_start_ups_succeed?language=en
Tim Minchin addresses University of Western Australia graduates (UPDATE: With transcript!) - Lousy Canuck
https://the-orbit.net/lousycanuck/2013/10/04/tim-minchin-addresses-university-of-western-australia-graduates/
Heraclitus: Life Is Flux - Ancient History Encyclopedia
https://www.ancient.eu/article/183/heraclitus-life-is-flux/
Dunning-Kruger Effect | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/basics/dunning-kruger-effect
The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change: Covey, Stephen R.: 9780743269513: Amazon.com: Books
https://www.amazon.com/Habits-Highly-Effective-People-Powerful/dp/0743269519
Zeros to heroes: Ulcer truth was hard to stomach | New Scientist
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727772-000-zeros-to-heroes-ulcer-truth-was-hard-to-stomach/
The Doctor Who Drank Infectious Broth, Gave Himself an Ulcer, and Solved a Medical Mystery | Discover Magazine
https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/the-doctor-who-drank-infectious-broth-gave-himself-an-ulcer-and-solved-a-medical-mystery
A Century of Helicobacter pylori Paradigms Lost – Paradigms Regained
https://www.karger.com/Article/PDF/7461
The Doctor Who Drank Infectious Broth, Gave Himself an Ulcer, and Solved a Medical Mystery | Discover Magazine
https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/the-doctor-who-drank-infectious-broth-gave-himself-an-ulcer-and-solved-a-medical-mystery
The Age of the Essay
http://www.paulgraham.com/essay.html
Thinking, Fast and Slow: Kahneman, Daniel: 8601200766745: Amazon.com: Books
https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555
The Art of “Negative Capability”: Keats on Embracing Uncertainty and Celebrating the Mysterious – Brain Pickings
https://www.brainpickings.org/2012/11/01/john-keats-on-negative-capability/
In computer science there are two main ways that you can store data, actually probably a better way to say it is, there are two types of data that are commonly stored in different ways;
Structured data include things like databases and MSExcel. People query the data with scripts to get answers, like a formula on an
Excel sheet to add up the sum of a column of numbers.
Unstructured data, like Word documents or the text in an email. Because the data has no inherent structure (think no column or row headings on the Excel spreadsheet) they (smart computer people) found it very hard to write a query in a structured way (again think how hard it would do an MSExcel formula with no column or row headings) so they store all the content in one ‘blob’ and use different programming and scripting languages to query the data and get an answer.
In much the same way, our conscious brain is constantly trying to structure incoming data and put things in boxes to make faster more efficient decisions (have a read of Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow book) . It’s the reason we have rules, religion and biases. Some the data that comes in gets structured quickly, like the headline in my news feed, “Trump sends in troops to Portland” quickly confirms my bias that Trump is ‘crazy and needs to be voted out’, and that’s where I store it [1] .
Our conscious captures a heap of data this way, gives it context and stores it as (often biased) information, and while it’s trying to store it in ’structured ‘categories’, there is often no relationship between these thoughts, and no logic behind a perspective other than a regurgitated view/s confirming your previous thinking, or that were based on the last thing you read. …biases huh, yup we all have them, thankfully, or we’d either be asleep by midday or explode from confusion given the number of independent, complex decisions we’d have to make each second.
But that’s only a small fragment of the data we consume, our sub conscious is continually taking in data and storing it in one big neutral blob of unstructured content.
So what the hell has this got to do with writing?
Writing allows me to at once, provide relationships between my conscious structured thoughts, to test and be curious ON them (not in them) and allows me occasional, focussed access to my sub conscious (by giving it a discrete problem to ponder) whereby it can be efficiently useful, rather than just delivering anxieties.
Meaning, my structured thoughts and subconscious don’t continue to muddle up my thinking, which can end up in external frustration (with my poor communication and others mis-understanding) and internal anxiety (‘I’m not really sure if I should worry about that’).
Anecdotally, I’ve found listening to authors on podcasts who have learnt to write well (publicly or privately) that they ‘seem’ more thoughtful, calm and centred people irrespective of any other successes they may have had.
As we, (actually its just me, you can sort yourself out :)) …..as I age I’d like to maintain any mental acuity and still /feel like/ I’m providing value to society. The key phrase there is ‘feel like’ - Irrespective of how few people read this, I’m comfortable with my perception being reality, given how much we all bend it to fit the shape of our ego. I can then be more accepting of the illusion that I’m actually choosing an outcome :)
So why not write about topics where I have some credentials?
I will no doubt bias towards those topics [2] , but the point of this content is to be able to come to a perspective on something irrespective of my level of expertise.
As it is with life, we are all constantly developing our own frameworks so we can think about something. I know the conclusion is likely wrong, and that I will need to keep testing my assumptions along the way, but I’m hoping to be directionally correct enough that the framing will help us both (mostly me) to more effectively and efficiently consume content on that topic.
Ultimately, writing this all down help me get get my thinking aligned on a topic at that point in time AND given I’m doing it anyway and want to learn the craft of writing, it may help you as well.
Plus, having documented on a topic, I may feel less compelled to bend conversations into the various thought progressions I’m having at the time. It’s not healthy for me, and am sure frustrating and annoying for those on the receiving end.
====================
[1] Others may view this headline as confirmation that Trump is protecting America again and he needs to stay in power. Neither is ‘right’ <link to Right Post>, we use these heuristics to simplify our thinking and save energy.
[2] Startups, data, saas, technology, marketing, product development, decision making, strategy, privacy, innovation, governance, parenting badly....