Category: 2024

I found it interesting how he was describing codes at the beginning and how we use these codes to make the process of thinking quicker. This was relatable because I usually do something similar while studying. So instead of reading and understanding something thoroughly, if it is familiar, I just fill in the blanks in my head using the idea I already understand, especially when I study math. 

The analogy he uses explains why we fall into the same habits of thought, since once a memory or pattern is formed, it is reinforced when new information is introduced and falls into the  deeper “grooves”.

I like this artist a lot, because when I was young I also liked thinking about random things. I have also thought about how other people hear my voice, because when I hear myself I am listening through my bones and flesh but when other people hear me they are listening through air. Opposingly, I wonder if anyone else wondered how I sound to myself. That is what she was doing, although I don’t think it was because of the same reasons, but I really liked her experimental idea.

The reading is interesting and it provides the author’s insights on how the mind recognizes patterns and processes them. It reminded me of something that I have came across in my life. In China there is a website which is very similar to Reddit. It has a section full of questions that sound ridiculous and people find amusing. For example, “The prision is full of criminals, why don’t the cops go there to capture them?””Why does meteorites always fall in meteorite pits?” After reading this chapter, I think the reason I find these questions ridiculous is because I am thinking with a preset pattern, and these questions violates some pieces of the pattern. But on the other hand, the people who came up with these questions managed to hop out of these patterns and rearrange them, making them kind of make sense but absurd if you really think about it. Even though the people.in the community call themselves “The mentally retarded”, I believe the questions are kind of genius in terms of creativity.

Reading the section “Code Communication” made me recall a thought process I often pondered. It is a simple question: “Why does one plus one equal two?” and not some obscure set of symbols? What does obscurity mean in the first place? We associate “1” with “one” because that is the predefined convention established by mathematicians. If different symbols were used, as long as there was a consensus on their meaning, the fundamental concepts wouldn’t change. This general consensus is what forms the basis of code communication that the book refers to.

Even in the title of this very blog, you might have been irked by the simultaneous use of a comma following a question mark. Since it deviates from the established norm, we have difficulty accepting it. Sure, one plus one equals two but that is only in the decimal number system. In binary, one plus one equals ten. So which is it? Two or ten? Both. “10” represents the same quantity that “2”. Because these number systems have different consensus, they have different codes to communicate by. And do not get me started on languages and their complexities. Perhaps, in a hypothetical alternate timeline, we have a simple system. Perhaps there, one plus one equals three.

 Lateral Thinking; Bono, Edward de (1970): How the Mind Works (pp 25-38)

I think the author made some insightful observations about the key limitations this habit of patterned thinking imposes – like rigid preconceptions, struggling to restructure ingrained ideas, and having our chains of logic overly dictated by the sequence information comes in. Recognizing those constraints we need to overcome is crucial for unlocking more innovative thinking capabilities.

The core principles of lateral thinking proposed, like using random stimuli to disrupt established patterns, make a really compelling case for why we need techniques to counter the brain’s hardwired tendencies. While some of the writing felt a bit dense, the overall framework provides a thought-provoking perspective on both the strengths and pitfalls of how we process information and arrive at ideas.

Basically, the main idea is that we need to work on thinking more outside the box to break free from our brain’s habit of just following the same old thought patterns over and over again. If we can build up our ability to explore ideas from new angles and not just get stuck in linear ruts, that flexibility is probably the key ingredient for having truly innovative breakthroughs and game-changing ideas. We’ve got to make an effort to stretch our minds in different directions instead of just going with the first assumptions that pop up.

Thoughts on  Mariana Carvalho

Mariana Carvalho’s creativity is undeniably fascinating, particularly in how she crafts her unique soundscapes. Although I personally wouldn’t categorize her work as music, her innovative methods, such as having people sing into her mouth, are intriguing. While her sound creations didn’t resonate with me and seemed more like a clash of sounds than cohesive music, I appreciate the insight into her creative process. It’s always interesting to see how different people’s creativity manifests, even if the results don’t always connect on a personal level. After all, music is highly subjective, and what may not sound like music to one person might be meaningful to another.

This chapter was interesting to me because I generally thought that patterns are a good thing, but after reading this chapter I realize that patterns can at times be limiting. I am not saying that patterns are bad, because they are not, but sometimes they may lead to jumping to the wrong conclusions or getting stuck, because we’re so used to specific orders that we miss new information. I particularly liked the example with the sequencing of shapes, because it proved rather simply how sometimes it’s not about doing the best or most efficient option but rather doing an unexpected one, which is the core of lateral thinking. 

When explaining the issues related to self-maximizing systems, the author said that there comes a time when one cannot proceed without restructuring the known pattern, and I believe that this is sometimes what gets us stuck when solving a problem. It’s the inability to start over, along with the knowledge that that we have done our best at each stage, that get us. Which circles back to the beginner’s mind example we discussed in class, since experts tend to have rigid patterns set in their field of expertise, beginners may be able to see things more clearly at times since they are not unintentionally searching for known patterns. This reading helped me understand a little bit more clearly why adopting lateral thinking at times may facilitate our thought process. 

Finally, this chapter discusses, in details, of why we need lateral thinking. Indeed, I kind of resonate with many parts of what’s been discussed in the book. For example, at first when it talks about how communication works like a sender and a receiver passing codes. This is normally what happens to us when we’re trying to recall something ourselves or remind others of something which happens on a daily basis. Also, the part where it says that our memory works like pouring water, in which some create the contours of the surface and then some leave marks and create sequences. This reminds me of what I read from some psychology books in which there’s the concept of confirmation bias. We usually don’t have a full picture of what really happened, in fact in most cases are just some blurry overall pictures. When someone talks about something that seems that align with the big picture, we immediately confirm with them and believe that it’s indeed what’s happened. Using the metaphors from book, this is like someone steps into the water hole that we create beforehand in our memory system. Also, I agree with the idea of how important restrcuturing is, in which when we process information, even though we could be correct at every stage but we still need to restructure before proceeding. Indeed, when I was reading this piece myself, I did a lot of back and forth reading/restructuring although I felt like I understood every single piece of it. Overall, I find this piece of reading very informative. It’s a little bit abstract, to be honest, and I don’t think I would fully comprehend it without the helps of the diagrams it provided.

• Different
• Unexpected
• Unique
• Daring
• Uncomfortable
• Bordering on dangerous
• Creative
• ASMR, but not the relaxing kind.

Mariana’s work is quite different from Otis’s, but both are very creative. I like how Mariana closely links her ideas to her work. I remember she talking about making music of inside and outside (not sure about the exact words), then she introduced her projects of having others sing in her mouth and putting the speaker in her mouth. This really surprised me. I’m curious how exactly she came up with this idea because it’s so creative. Indeed, her music is not the type that I would normally listen (I’m more of a classical guy), but having experimental artists like her trying these creative stuffs certainly helps the devlopement of art.

I was really interested in this reading. The discussion on lateral thinking presented here offers a compelling insight into why it is essential to distinguish and develop this type of thinking alongside more traditional, vertical thinking processes. What resonates most with me is the notion that lateral thinking does not seek to undermine vertical thinking but rather to enhance its effectiveness by injecting creativity and alternative perspectives.

The text explains how lateral thinking operates as a complement rather than a contradiction to vertical thinking, emphasizing its role in problem-solving and innovation. The idea that lateral thinking is generative, continuously creating multiple pathways and alternatives, is particularly intriguing. This approach can foster a more dynamic and flexible mindset, essential in today’s rapidly changing environments where traditional solutions often fall short.

Moreover, the point about the mind’s pattern-making system and its limitations serves as a powerful reminder of why lateral thinking is necessary. It challenges us to break free from established patterns and explore new territories, pushing the boundaries of what is possible. The analogy of the mind as a self-organizing system, akin to rain sculpting a landscape, beautifully illustrates how our thoughts and ideas shape and are shaped by the patterns we recognize and establish.

I think embracing lateral thinking can be a transformative tool for personal and professional growth. It encourages a more exploratory and imaginative approach to challenges, allowing for a richer array of solutions and a deeper understanding of the complexities of any given problem. It’s not just about finding different answers but about changing the very questions we ask.