Think

The theory


Looking back on old emails, I've noticed again one that I haven't really posted anything about. My reader asked what were my thoughts on "rational" vs "irrational" thinking. My understanding is that when people say "rational" they mean that somebody is making a decision based fundamentally on their thoughts, ignoring their feelings, and if they are making the decision based on their emotions, ignoring their thoughts, they are "irrational".

If you look again at the wheel of life, you'll notice that there is an arrow from Think to Feel, and an arrow back from Feel to Think. That's because our thoughts affect our feelings, but our feelings affect our thoughts as well. If you are in a forest and you think there are wolves around, you will be afraid. But if you go into a forest and you are already scared (maybe because you were running away from your angry uncle), you are much more likely to think that that strange noise could be... a pack of wolves!

That's why most of the time, we find it very difficult to disentangle our thoughts and our feelings. I read once that making a difficult decision is like trying to weigh a litter of kittens when the kittens are jumping from one plate of the scales to the other constantly. There is a lot of truth in this: for difficult decisions, our mind constantly jumps from juggling up a lot of thoughts and possibilities to focusing on a lot of stomach-churning, mixed feelings. It's no surprise it's hard to make up your mind!

There are two easy, but not very good, solutions to this problem. One is not even trying. People who don't even try are often labeled "irrational" by people who make an effort to disentangle thoughts and feelings. This isn't very fair, because everybody thinks. The other solution is suppressing your feelings. This isn't a great idea either, as I said on the post about feelings.

The best solution, as Greek philosophers discovered 2,500 years ago, is to disentangle them, look at them separately, and make your decisions after you are quite clear which things you are thinking and which things you are feeling. This is what their courts of law did, and what they still do nowadays. The jury is asked to do the thinking: Do you think, beyond reasonable doubt, that this person did this and that? Then the judge is the one who decides on the sentence: what does he or she feel is the right punishment for those actions?

If your thoughts and feelings don't seem to be entirely consistent with each other, ask yourself why until you feel confident that you understand the situation well enough to make a decision. This method allows you to double-check: when your thoughts and feelings are in line, you can be pretty sure that you are in the right track; if not, it gives you the space to try and figure out what is really going on there before you make a choice.

To disentangle your thoughts from your feelings, what you need to do is focus on the facts of the matter. What do you think are the facts, whether you like them or not? And how certain are you of them? You can be 100% certain of things you have watched yourself. You can't be 100% certain of things you've been told, you'll have to estimate the uncertainty: How much do you trust this person? What reasons do you know they might have to lie or hide facts? Then there are things you think about it, what you deduce of things you've seen and you've been told. Again, how certain are you of your deductions? It may be useful to ask yourself the questions that are asked in courts of law about probabilities: which facts do you think are most likely true on the balance or probabilities? And which facts do you think are almost certainly true, beyond reasonable doubt?

Only after you've thought about the facts, you can go back to your feelings. How do you feel about each of these facts? How do you feel about the facts that you believe are true but aren't certain? How would you feel if you were wrong about those facts and you made a choice assuming you were right?

After you've done this, what is the picture that emerges? Do you have a clearer idea of what your goals are? (you should, really, or you haven't done your homework properly). Do you have some idea on how to deal with the obstacles? Have you made up your mind on what to do? Have you changed your mind on what to do? Do you still want to do anything at all? Would it be better to wait for something? Or does the issue look more urgent than before? And the most important question: what are your options, realistically?

If you've gone through all this, chances are that by now you are quite sure about which way to choose. If not, future posts may be able to help.

The practice

Experiment 1

There is little doubt that humans are the best thinkers of all animals. In fact, some of our problems probably come from humans becoming so good at thinking in so little evolutionary time - nature hasn't ironed out all the wrinkles yet for making a really good thinker. Unfortunately, this leads to two common, but wrong, attitudes from humans to animals: One is believing that humans are so superior they can do anything they like to animals, they're not much better than plants. The other is believing that animals are almost like humans, just with different bodies. Truth is, animals think a lot more and better than plants, but not quite as well as humans.

The best way of finding what is the right attitude towards animals is simply watching, playing and experimenting with them. If you have a pet, set some simple problems to them and see if they can figure out the answer. "Simple" may mean really, really simple. Apparently earthworms can learn a simple T-shaped maze, and eventually know that nice compost is always found on the right side.

Experiment 2

Pick any issue that has been bothering you, the kind that feels like kittens are jumping from one plate of the scales to the other constanty. Go through the questions in the theory section above. After thinking all this, does it appear any clearer?