Epilepsy means seizure disorder.
So people with epilepsy have recurring and unpredictable seizures. A seizure is a period where a cells in the brain or neurons are a synchronously active or active at the same time when they're not supposed to be. Now when I say neurons are active, I mean that they're firing or sending a message using electrical signals relayed from neuron to neuron.
And if you look at a neuron under a microscope each electrical signal that passes through it is really just ions flowing in and out through protein channels.
The way this ion flow is controlled is through neurotransmitters (a type of signaling molecule) and receptors. Neurotransmitters bind to The receptors and basically tell the cell to either open up the ion channels and relay the electrical message called excitatory neurotransmitters or close the ion channels and stop the electrical message called inhibitory transmitters.
During a seizure clusters of neurons in the brain become temporarily impaired and start sending out a ton of excitatory signals over and over again. And these are sometimes said to be paroxysmal. These paroxysmal electrical discharges are thought to happen due to either too much excitation or too little inhibition which are kind of two sides of the same coin, right?
The main excitatory neurotransmitter in the brain is glutamate and NMDA is the primary receptor that responds to glutamate by opening ion channels that let calcium in, a positive ion that tells the cell to send signals.
Some patients with epilepsy seem to have faster long-lasting activation of these receptors on the flip side.
The main inhibitory neurotransmitter in the brain is GABA which binds to GABA receptors that tell the cell to inhibit the signal by opening channels that let in chloride ions, which are negative ions that tell the cell to inhibit signals. Some patients with epilepsy seem to have genetic mutations in which their GABA receptors are dysfunctional and so they are able to inhibit signals in addition to potentially having a primary genetic cause though these receptors and ion channels might be affected by all sorts of things like brain tumors, brain injury or infection.
Whether it's a decrease in inhibition or an increase in activation, when groups of neurons start firing simultaneously over and over it's often noticed by others as obvious outward signs, like jerking, moving and losing consciousness, but can also be subjective experiences that are only noticed by the person experiencing it like fears or a strange smells. It all depends on which neurons in the brain are affected.
People with epilepsy experience recurring episodes of some form of seizures and we can start grouping the seizures by the region of the brain that's affected. When the affected area is limited to one Hemisphere or one half of the brain or sometimes even a smaller area like a single lobe. We call it a partial or a focal seizure.
These seizures just can be sub categorized by whether someone remains conscious during the seizure which is called a simple partial seizure or whether someone has impaired Consciousness during the seizure, which is called a complex partial seizure. Simple partial seizures typically affect a small area of the brain and can involve the person experiencing strange Sensations like hearing or tasting something but can also involve jerking movements in specific muscle groups at the neurons controlling those muscles are affected if the jerking activity starts in a specific muscle group and spreads to surrounding muscle groups as more neurons are affected. It's referred to as a Jacksonian March.
Typically, the person is conscious meaning that there are awake and alert and will usually know that something's happening and we'll remember the seizure afterwards complex partial seizures on the other hand involves losing Consciousness completely or having impaired awareness and responsiveness. So they might not remember exactly what happened during a seizure.
Now in contrast to the partial or focal seizure, a generalized seizures were both hemispheres of the brain are affected.
Sometimes the seizure will start out as a partial seizure and then quickly develop into a generalized seizure. And in those situations would be called a secondary generalized seizure because a partial seizure came before it and was the primary event.
Just like partial seizures. There are some subcategories of generalized seizures as well.
One subtype is a tonic seizure where the muscles all the sudden becomes stiff and flexed which can cause the patient to fall often backwards on the flip side though. They can be a tonic as well or their muscles suddenly relax and become floppy which again can cause the patient to fall but this time forward seizures can also be clonic where they have violent muscle contractions also known as convulsions tonic-clonic seizures are the most common generalized seizures where patients experience a tonic phase where the muscles suddenly tense up followed by a clonic phase where the muscles rapidly contract and relax.
Myoclonic seizures are yet Another type and are short muscle twitches. Sometimes just a single twitch, but sometimes many in a short amount of time.
Finally, there are absence seizures where the patients lose consciousness and then quickly regain consciousness. Generally with the only outward sign being that the person looks like they spaced out like if there are walking they'll suddenly stand still.
The key for all these is that they involve both hemispheres of the brain and patients lose Consciousness either briefly or for longer periods of time.
If the seizures do last for a longer period of time like over five minutes of ongoing seizures or having multiple seizures without returning to normal in between then it's called status epilepticus.
And these are usually the tonic-clonic subtype of seizures, but it can also be caused by other types that don't involve convulsions. This situation is considered a medical emergency and can be life-threatening if not treated immediately.
Due to the severity of these seizures patients are often treated acutely with benzodiazepines which helped enhance the effect of the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA.
Following a seizure sometimes patients experience certain symptoms like confusion called postictal confusion, which means after seizure confusion. Also patients might experience paralysis that affects the arms of the legs usually just limited to one side of the body and this is known as Todd's paralysis or Todd's paresis and can last for quite a while on average about 15 hours.
And usually it subsides by itself completely after two days the precise mechanism behind cause paralysis isn't currently well understood.
But it's not to be the result of temporary but severe suppression of activity of the area in the brain affected by the seizure. Typically after a seizures over patients will have brain imaging techniques like MRI or CT scans as well as an EEG or electroencephalogram which detects electrical activity in the brain.
With patients who have just started having seizures brain scans are used to find out if there are any anatomical abnormalities like brain tumors or abnormal blood vessels that could be causing the seizures both of which would be treated surgically. Because epilepsy can vary from patient to patient in the type severity and frequency of the seizures, diagnosis typically involves a variety of examinations and tests in combination with a thorough evaluation of their clinical history.
Once epilepsy has been diagnosed. It's often treated with daily medication the primary form of medication being anticonvulsants, of which there are a wide variety of options available that have different targets in the brain.
So the choice is based on the specific needs of the patient including factors, like age, lifestyle, other health problems and the category or subcategory of the epilepsy syndrome.
Other treatment options include epilepsy surgery where they'll remove what's thought to be causing the seizures like a specific part of the brain or a tumor.
Nerve stimulation might also be considered where a certain nerves like the vagus nerve are stimulated, which is thought to control seizures by influencing neurotransmitter release.
Also patients might adopt a ketogenic diet, which is a diet that forces the body to burn fat instead of carbohydrates, which produces Ketone bodies which are then used by the brain as an energy source instead of glucose. Although many hypotheses have been suggested for why the seems to reduce seizures for some patients, the exact mechanism isn't very well understood.
If you're interested in a deeper dive on this topic take a look at osmosis.org where it has flashcards, questions and other awesome tools to help you learn medicine.
Rediscovering or reinvigorating friendship doesn't prevent couples from arguing. Instead, it gives them a secret
weapon that prevents quarrels from getting out of hand. For example, here's what happens when Olivia and Nathaniel
argue. As they plan to move from the city to the suburbs, tensions between them are high. Although they see eye to
eye on which house to buy and how to decorate it, they are locking horns over buying a new car. Olivia thinks they
should join the suburban masses and get a minivan. To Nathaniel nothing could be drearier--he wants a Jeep. The more
they talk about it, the higher the decibel level gets. If you were a fly on the wall of their bedroom, you would
have serious doubts about their future together. Then all of a sudden, Olivia puts her hands on her hips and, in
perfect imitation of their four-year-old son, sticks out her tongue. Since Nathaniel knows that she's about to do
this, he sticks out his tongue first. Then they both start laughing. As always, this silly contest defuses the
tension between them.
In our research we actually have a technical name for what Olivia and Nathaniel did. Probably unwittingly, they used
a repair attempt. This name refers to any statement or action--silly or otherwise—that prevents negativity from
escalating out of control. Repair attempts are the secret weapon of emotionally intelligent couples--even though
many of these couples aren't aware that they are doing something so powerful. When a couple have a strong
friendship, they naturally become experts at sending each other repair attempts and at correctly reading those sent
their way. But when couples are in negative override, even a repair statement as blunt as "Hey, I'm sorry" will have
a low success rate.
The first sign leading to a divorce: harsh startup
The most obvious indicator that this discussion (and this marriage) is not going to go well is the way it begins.
Dara immediately becomes negative and accusatory. When Oliver broaches the subject of housework, she's ready to be
sarcastic. "Or lack thereof," she says. Oliver tries to lighten things up by cracking a joke: "Or the book we were
talking about writing: Men are pigs." Dara sits pokerfaced. They talk a bit more, trying to devise a plan to make
sure Oliver does his share, and then Dara says, "I mean, I'd like to see it resolved, but it doesn't seem like it
is. I mean, I've tried making up lists, and that doesn't work. And I've tried letting you do it on your own, and
nothing got done for a month." Now she's blaming Oliver. In essence, she's saying the problem isn't the
housekeeping, it's him.
The second sign: the four horsemen
Horseman 1: Criticism.
You will always have some complaints about the person you live with. But there's a world of difference between a
complaint and a criticism. A complaint only addresses the specific action at which your spouse failed. A criticism
is more global—it adds on some negative words about your mate's character or personality. "I'm really angry that you
didn't sweep the kitchen floor last night. We agreed that we'd take turns doing it" is a complaint.
"Why are you so forgetful? I hate having to always sweep the kitchen floor when it's your turn. You just don't care"
is a criticism. A complaint focuses on a specific behavior, but a criticism ups the ante by throwing in blame and
general character assassination. Here's a recipe: To turn any complaint into a criticism, just add my favorite line:
"What is wrong with you?"
Horseman 2: Contempt.
Dara doesn't stop at criticizing Oliver. Soon she's literally sneering. When he suggests that they keep a list of his
chores on the refrigerator to help him remember, she says, "Do you think you work really well with lists?" Next,
Oliver tells her that he needs fifteen minutes to relax when he gets home before starting to do chores. "So if I
leave you alone for fifteen minutes, then you think you'll be motivated to jump up and do something?" she asks him.
"Maybe. We haven't tried it, have we?" Oliver asks.
Dara has an opportunity here to soften up, but instead she comes back with sarcasm. "I think you do a pretty good job
of coming home and lying around or disappearing into the bathroom," she says. And then she adds challengingly "So
you think that's the cure- all, to give you fifteen minutes?"
This sarcasm and cynicism are types of contempt. So are name-calling, eye-rolling, sneering, mockery, and hostile
humor. In whatever form, contempt--the worst of the four horsemen--is poisonous to a relationship because it conveys
disgust. It's virtually impossible to resolve a problem when your partner is getting the message you're disgusted
with him or her. Inevitably, contempt leads to more conflict rather than to reconciliation.
Horseman 3: Defensiveness.
It's no surprise, considering how nasty her husband is being, that Cynthia defends herself. She points out that she
doesn't get her car washed as often as he thinks. She explains that it's more difficult physically for her to wash
her car herself than it is for him to wash his truck.
Although it's understandable that Cynthia would defend herself, research shows that this approach rarely has the
desired effect. The attacking spouse does not back down or apologize. This is because defensiveness is really a way
of blaming your partner.
You're saying, in effect, "The problem isn't me, it's you." Defensiveness just escalates the conflict, which is why
it's so deadly. When Cynthia tells Peter how hard it is for her to wash her car, he doesn't say, "Oh, now I
understand." He ignores her excuse--he doesn't even acknowledge what she's said. He climbs farther up his high moral
ground, telling her how well he takes care of his vehicle and implying that she's spoiled for not doing the same.
Cynthia can't win—and neither can their marriage.
Horseman 4: Stonewalling.
In marriages like Dara and Oliver's, where discussions begin with a harsh startup, where criticism and contempt lead
to defensiveness, which leads to more contempt and more defensiveness, eventually one partner tunes out. This
heralds the arrival of the fourth horseman.
Think of the husband who comes home from work, gets met with a barrage of criticism from his wife, and hides behind
the newspaper. The less responsive he is, the more she yells. Eventually he gets up and leaves the room. Rather than
confronting his wife, he disengages. By turning away from her, he is avoiding a fight, but he is also avoiding his
marriage. He has become a stone waller. Although both husbands and wives can be stone wallers, this behavior is far
more common among men, for reasons we'll see later.
During a typical conversation between two people, the listener gives all kinds of cues to the speaker that he's
paying attention. He may use eye contact, nod his head, say something like "Yeah" or "uh-huh". But a stone waller
doesn't give you this sort of casual feedback. He tends to look away or down without uttering a sound. He sits like
an impassive stone wall. The stone waller acts as though he couldn't care less about what you're saying, if he even
hears it.
The third sign: flooding
It may seem to Rita that her complaints have no effect on Mack. But nothing could be further from the truth. Usually
people stonewall as a protection against feeling flooded. Flooding means that your spouse's negativity--whether in
the guise of criticism or contempt or even defensiveness--is so overwhelming, and so sudden, that it leaves you
shell-shocked. You feel so defenseless against this sniper attack that you learn to do anything to avoid a replay
The more often you feel Hooded by your spouse's criticism or contempt, the more hyper vigilant you are for cues that
your spouse is about to "blow" again. All you can think about is protecting yourself from the turbulence your
spouse's onslaught causes. And the way to do that is to disengage emotionally from the relationship. No wonder Mack
and Rita are now divorced.
The fourth Sign: body language
Recurring episodes of flooding lead to divorce for two reasons. First, they signal that at least one partner feels
severe emotional distress when dealing with the other. Second, the physical sensations of feeling flooded--the
increased heart rate, sweating, and so on-make it virtually impossible to have a productive, problem-solving
discussion. When your body goes into overdrive during an argument, it is responding to a very primitive alarm system
we inherited from our prehistoric ancestors. All those distressful reactions, like a pounding heart and sweating,
occur because on a fundamental level your body perceives your current situation as dangerous. Even though we live in
the age of in vitro conception, organ transplants, and gene mapping, from an evolutionary standpoint not much time
has passed since we were cave dwellers. So the human body has not refined its fear reactions--it responds the same
way, whether you're facing a saber-toothed tiger or a contemptuous spouse demanding to know why you can never
remember to put the toilet seat back down.
The fifth sign: failed repair attempts
Repair attempts save marriages not just because they decrease emotional tension between spouses, but because by
lowering the stress level they also prevent your heart from racing and making you feel flooded. When the four
horsemen rule a couple's communication, repair attempts often don't even get noticed. Especially when you're feeling
flooded, you're not able to hear a verbal white flag.
In unhappy marriages a feedback loop develops between the four horsemen and the failure of repair attempts. The more
contemptuous and defensive the couple is with each other, the more flooding occurs, and the harder it is to hear and
respond to a repair. And since the repair is not heard, the contempt and defensiveness just get heightened, making
flooding more pronounced, which makes it more difficult to hear the next repair attempt, until finally one partner
withdraws.
The sixth sign: bad memories
When a relationship gets subsumed in negativity, it's not only the couple's present and future life together that are
put at risk. Their past is in danger, too. When I interview couples, I usually ask about the history of their
marriage. I have found over and over that couples who are deeply entrenched in a negative view of their spouse and
their marriage often rewrite their past.
Most couples enter marriage with high hopes and great expectations. In a happy marriage couples tend to look back on
their early days fondly. Even if the wedding didn't go off perfectly, they tend to remember the highlights rather
than the low points. The same goes for each other. They remember how positive they felt early on, how excited they
were when they met, and how much admiration they had for each other. When they talk about the tough times they've
had, they glorify the struggles they've been through, drawing strength from the adversity they weathered together.
But when a marriage is not going well, history gets rewritten for the worse. Now she recalls that he was thirty
minutes late getting to the ceremony. Or he focuses on all that time she spent talking to his best man at the
rehearsal dinner--or "flirting" with his friend, as it seems to him now. Another sad sign is when you find the past
difficult to remember--it has become so unimportant or painful that you've let it fade away.
CH 3: Principle 1:
Enhance Your Love Maps
Rory was a pediatrician who ran an intensive care unit for babies. He was beloved at the hospital, where everybody
called him Dr. Rory. He was a reserved man but capable of great warmth, humor, and charm. He was also a workaholic
who slept in the hospital an average of twenty nights a month. He didn't know the names of his children's friends,
or even the name of the family dog. When he was asked where the back door to the house was, he turned to ask his
wife, Lisa.
His wife was upset with how little she saw of Rory and how emotionally unconnected to her he seemed to be. She
frequently tried to make little gestures to show him she cared, but her attempts just annoyed him. She was left with
the sense that he simply didn't value her or their marriage.
To this day I'm struck by the story of this couple. Here was an intellectually gifted man who didn't even know the
name of the family dog or how to find the back door! Of the many problems their relationship faced, perhaps the most
fundamental was Rory's shocking lack of knowledge about his home life. He had become so caught up in his work that
little space was left over in his brain for the basics of his wife's world.
As bizarre as Rory's rampant ignorance may sound, I have found that many married couples fall into a similar (if less
dramatic) habit of inattention to the details of their spouse's life. One or both partners may have only the
sketchiest sense of the other's joys, likes, dislikes, fears, stresses. The husband may love modern art, but his
wife couldn't tell you why or who his favorite artist is. He doesn't remember the names of her friends or the
coworker she fears is constantly trying to undermine her.
In contrast, emotionally intelligent couples are intimately familiar with each other's world. I call this having a
richly detailed love map--my term for that part of your brain where you store all the relevant information about
your partner's life. Another way of saying this is that these couples have made plenty of cognitive room for their
marriage. They remember the major events in each other's history, and they keep updating their information as the
facts and feelings of their spouse's world change. When she orders him a salad, she knows to ask for his dressing on
the side. If she works late, he'll tape her favorite TV show because he knows which one it is and when it's on. He
could tell you how she's feeling about her boss, and exactly how to get to her office from the elevator. He knows
that religion is important to her but that deep down she has doubts. She knows that he fears being too much like his
father and considers himself a "free spirit." They know each other's goals in life, each other's worries, each
other's hopes.
Without such a love map, you can't really know your spouse. And if you don't really know someone, how can you truly
love them? No wonder the biblical term for sexual love is to "know."
Love Maps Questionnaire
By giving honest answers to the following questions, you will get a sense of the quality of your current love maps.
For the most accurate reading of how your marriage is doing on this first principle, both of you should complete the
following.
Read each statement and circle T for "true" or F for "false."
1. I can name my partner's best friends. T F
2. I can tell you what stresses my partner is currently facing. T F
3. I know the names of some of the people who have been irritating my partner lately. T F
4. I can tell you some of my partner's life dreams. T F
5. I am very familiar with my partner's religious beliefs and ideas. TF
6. I can tell you about my partner's basic philosophy of life. T F
7. I can list the relatives my partner likes the least. T F
8. I know my partner's favorite music. T F
9. I can list my partner's three favorite movies, T F
10. My spouse is familiar with my current stresses. T F
11. Know the three most special times in my partner's life. T F
12. I can tell you the most stressful thing that happened to my partner as a child. T F
13. I can list my partner's major aspirations and hopes in life. T F
14. I know my partner's major current worries. T F
15. My spouse knows who my friends are. T F
16. I know what my partner would want to do if he or she suddenly won the lottery. T F
17. I can tell you in detail my first impressions of my partner. T F
18. Periodically I ask my partner about his or her world right now. TF
19. I feel that my partner knows me pretty well. T F
20. My spouse is familiar with my hopes and aspirations. T F
Scoring: Give yourself one point for each "true" answer.
10 or above: This is an area of strength for your marriage. You have a fairly detailed map of your spouse's everyday
life, hopes, fears, and dreams. You know what makes your spouse "tick." Based on your score you'll probably find the
love map exercises that follow easy and gratifying. They will serve as a reminder of how connected you and your
partner are. Try not to take for granted this knowledge and understanding of each other. Keeping in touch in this
way ensures you'll be well equipped to handle any problem areas that crop up in your relationship.
Below 10: Your marriage could stand some improvement in this area. Perhaps you never had the time or the tools to
really get to know each other. Or perhaps your love maps have become outdated as your lives have changed over the
years. In either case, by taking the time to learn more about your spouse now, you'll find your relationship becomes
stronger.
Go through this chapter in the book to find out some games that will improve your love map with your partner.
CH 4: Principle 2:
Nurture Your Fondness and Admiration
Learning from history
As it was with Rory and Lisa, the best test of whether a couple still has a functioning fondness and admiration
system is usually how they view their past. If your marriage is now in deep trouble, you're not likely to elicit
much praise on each other's behalf by asking about the current state of affairs. But by focusing on your past, you
can often detect embers of positive feelings.
Of course, some marriages do come up empty. In these relationships the antagonism has metastasized like a virulent
cancer, even going backward in time and destroying the couple's positive memories. We saw that sad result in the
marriage of Peter and Cynthia, who argued over washing her car. Their relationship was ruined by his contempt and
her defensiveness. When they were asked the same questions about their early years, it became clear that their love
was gone. They could remember very little about the beginning of their relationship. When asked what they used to do
when they were dating, they gave each other a brief "help me out here" glance and then sat silently, racking their
brains for an answer. Peter couldn't remember a single thing he admired about Cynthia back then. Their marriage was
not salvageable.
The antidote to contempt
At first, this may all seem obvious to the point of being ridiculous: People who are happily married like each other.
If they didn't, they wouldn't be happily married. But fondness and admiration can be fragile unless you remain aware
of how crucial they are to the friendship that is at the core of any good marriage. By simply reminding yourself of
your spouse's positive qualities--even as you grapple with each other's flaws--you can prevent a happy marriage from
deteriorating. The simple reason is that fondness and admiration are antidotes for contempt. If you maintain a sense
of respect for your spouse, you are less likely to act disgusted with him or her when you disagree. So fondness and
admiration prevent the couple from being trounced by the four horsemen.
Go through this chapter in the book to find out some games that will increase your fondness and admiration for
your partner.
CH 5: Principle 3:
Turn toward Each Other Instead of Away
None of the footage taped in our Love Lab would win anybody an Oscar. Our archives are filled if with scenes in which
the husband looks out the picture window and says, "Wow, look at that boat," and the wife peers over her magazine
and says, "Yeah, it looks like that big schooner we saw last summer, remember?" and the husband grunts.
You might think I'd find viewing hour after hour of such scenes unbearably boring. On the contrary: When couples
engage in lots of chitchat like this, I can be pretty sure that they will stay happily married. What's really
happening in these brief exchanges is that the husband and wife are connecting--they are turning toward each other.
In couples who go on to divorce or live together unhappily, such small moments of connection are rare. More often
the wife doesn't even look up from her magazine--and if she does, her husband doesn't acknowledge what she says.
Hollywood has dramatically distorted our notions of romance and what makes passion burn. Watching Humphrey Bogart
gather teary-eyed Ingrid Bergman into his arms may make your heart pound, but real-life romance is fueled by a far
more humdrum approach to staying connected. It is kept alive each time you let your spouse know he or she is valued
during the grind of everyday life. Comical as it may sound, romance actually grows when a couple are in the
supermarket and the wife says, "Are we out of bleach?" and the husband says, "I don't know. Let me go get some just
in case," instead of shrugging apathetically. It grows when you know your spouse is having a bad day at work and you
take sixty seconds out of your own workday to leave words of encouragement on his voice mail. It grows when your
wife tells you one morning, "I had the worst nightmare last night," and you say, "I'm in a big hurry, but tell me
about it now so we can talk about it tonight," instead of "I don't have time." In all of these instances husband and
wife are making a choice to turn toward each other rather than away in marriage people periodically make what I call
"bids" for their partner's attention, affection, humor, or support. People either turn toward one another after
these bids or they turn away. Turning toward is the basis of emotional connection, romance, passion, and a good sex
life. So in the Love Lab my favorite scenes are the very ones that any Hollywood film editor would relegate to the
cutting room floor. I know there's deep drama in the little moments: Will they read the Sunday paper together or
silently alone? Will they chat while they eat lunch? Watching them is suspenseful because I know: Couples who turn
toward each other remain emotionally engaged and stay married. Those that don't eventually lose their way.
The reason for the differing outcome of these marriages is what I've come to call the couple's emotional bank
account. Partners who characteristically turn toward each other rather than away are putting money in the bank. They
are building up emotional savings that can serve as a cushion when times get rough, when they're faced with a major
life stress or conflict. Because they have stored up all of this goodwill, they are better able to make allowances
for each other when a conflict arises. They can maintain a positive sense of each other and their marriage even
during hard times.
The biggest payoff from this emotional bank account isn't the cushion it offers when the couple are stressed. As I
said, turning toward your spouse in the little ways is also the key to long-lasting romance. Many people think that
the secret to reconnecting with their partner is a candlelit dinner or a by-the-sea vacation. But the real secret is
to turn toward each other in little ways every day. A romantic night out really turns up the heat only when a couple
has kept the pilot light burning by staying in touch in the little ways. It's easy to imagine Justine and Michael,
the couple who recalled their wedding and courtship with such delight, at a candlelit restaurant. But sit Peter and
Cynthia, the couple who couldn't agree on car washing or much of anything else, in the same chairs, and the evening
would most likely be a fiasco, filled with accusations, recriminations, or awkward silences.
Is your Marriage Primed for Romance?
To get a good sense of how your relationship is faring (or is likely to fare in the future) in the romance
department, answer the following questions.
Read each statement and circle T for "true" or F for "false."
1. We enjoy doing small things together (folding laundry, watching TV) T F
2. I look forward to spending my free time with my partner. T F
3. At the end of the day my partner is glad to see me. T F
4. My partner is usually interested in hearing my views. T F
5. I really enjoy discussing things with my partner. T F
6. My partner is one of my best friends. T F
7. I think my partner would consider me a very close friend. T F
8. We just love talking to each other. T F
9. When we go out together, the time goes very quickly. T F
10. We always have a lot to say to each other, T F
11. We have a lot of fun together. T F
12. We are spiritually very compatible. T F
13. We tend to share the same basic values. T F
14. We like to spend time together in similar ways. T F
15. We really have a lot of common interests. T F
16. We have many of the same dreams and goals. T F
17. We like to do a lot of the same things. T F
18. Even though our interests are somewhat different, I enjoy my partner's interests. T F
19. Whatever we do together, we usually tend to have a good time, T F
20. My partner tells me when he or she has had a bad day. T F
Scoring: Give yourself one point for each "true" answer.
10 or above: Congratulations! This is an area of strength in your marriage. Because you are so often "there" for each
other during the minor events in your lives, you have built up a hefty emotional bank account that will support you
over any rough patches in your marriage (and keep many at bay). It's those little moments that you rarely think
about—when you're shopping at the supermarket, folding laundry, or having a quickie catch up call while you're both
still at work--that make up the heart and soul of a marriage. Having a surplus in your emotional bank account is
what makes romance last and gets you through hard times, bad moods, and major life changes.
Below 10: Your marriage could stand some improvement in this area. By learning to turn toward each other more during
the minor moments in your day, you will make your marriage not only more stable but more romantic. Every time you
make the effort to listen and respond to what your spouse says, to help him or her, you make your marriage a little
better.
Go through this chapter in the book to find out some games that will help you make turning toward each other an
easy, natural part of your lives together.
CH 6: Principle 4:
Let Your Partner Influence You
Jack was considering buying a used blue Honda. The car seemed like a great deal since the seller, Phil, had only
owned it for a month. The car was for sale because Phil's company was suddenly transferring him to London. Jack
liked the car's handling and power, not to mention the state-of the-art sound system. He was ready to do a deal, but
first, he told Phil, he wanted a mechanic to check the car. "Why?" said Phil. "It's really a new car. It only has
three hundred miles, and you get the manufacturer's warranty."
"True," said Jack, "but I promised my wife I wouldn't buy a car without having it inspected first."
Phil gave Jack a withering look. "You let your wife tell you what to do about cars?" he asked.
"Sure," said Jack. "Don't you?"
"Well, no. I don't--didn't. I'm divorced," said Phil.
"Well," Jack chuckled. "Maybe that's why"
Jack had the car checked by his mechanic, and it turned out that the rear bumper needed to be replaced, so he never
bought Phil's car.
But more importantly, he never bought Phil's attitude toward women. Jack has made his wife a partner in his decision
making. He respects and honors his wife and her opinions and feelings. He understands that for his marriage to
thrive, he has to share the driver's seat.
There was a time when Phil's macho attitude wasn't necessarily a liability for a husband. But our data suggest that
this is no longer the case. In our long-term study of 130 newlywed couples, now in its eighth year, we have found
that, even in the first few months of marriage, men who allow their wives to influence them have happier marriages
and are less likely to divorce than men who resist their wives' influence. Statistically speaking, when a man is not
willing to share power with his partner, there is an 81 percent chance that his marriage will self-destruct.
Obviously it takes two to make or break a marriage, so we're not singling out men here. The point of this chapter is
not to scold, bash, or insult men. It's certainly just as important for wives to treat their husbands with honor and
respect. But my data indicate that the vast majority of wives--even in unstable marriages--already do that. This
doesn't mean that they don't get angry and even contemptuous of their husbands. It just means that they let their
husbands influence their decision making by taking their opinions and feelings into account. But too often men do
not return the favor.
What husbands can learn from wives
Perhaps most importantly, when a husband accepts his wife's influence, his open attitude also heightens the positive
in his relationship by strengthening his friendship with his wife. This will make it far easier for him to follow
the first three principles: deepening his love map, bolstering fondness and admiration, and turning toward his wife
as a matter of course.
This occurs not just because the absence of frequent power struggles makes the marriage more pleasurable, but because
such a husband is open to learning from his wife. And there's no doubt that women have plenty to teach men about
friendship. In his book The Complete Book of Guys, Dave Barry writes about the huge gap between men and women in
this regard. He recounts that every year he and his wife get together with some old friends. The wives immediately
begin an intense catching-up conversation about their inner feelings. He and the other husband watch the playoffs.
The men do get emotional at times--usually when deciding which kind of pizza to order. Later, when the couples have
parted company, Barry's wife will say something like "Isn't it amazing how well George has adjusted to having his
leg amputated?" And Barry will pretend that of course he had noticed George was missing a leg. Barry is
exaggerating, but the story is funny because it reveals a basic truth: Women are more oriented toward discussing and
understanding feelings than are men.
I'm not suggesting that all women are sawier about emotions and have better "people skills" than all men. There are
plenty of women who are tone deaf to social nuances and insensitive to others. But usually women are more
emotionally intelligent than their husbands for one simple reason: They've had an enormous head start in acquiring
these skills. Observe children at any playground, and you'll see that head start in action. When young boys play
(usually run-and-chase games) their priority is the game itself--not their relationship with each other and their
feelings. But for little girls, feelings are paramount. A cry of "I'm not your friend anymore" will stop a game
cold. Whether it starts up again will depend on whether the girls make up.
Even when a boy and girl play with the same toy the gender difference is apparent. When four-year-old best friends
Naomi and Eric shared her baby doll she wanted to play that the doll was their baby and they were going to show it
off to their friends (relationship based play). He went along with this for about ten minutes, and then the game
roller-coaster into boy territory: "Hey Naomi, this baby is dead!" he announced. "We have to get it to the hospital
right away!"
He climbed into a pretend ambulance and away he went, "Brrrrrrrrr." Naomi urged him not to drive too fast. Suddenly
they both became surgeons and saved the baby's life. (Eric wanted Naomi to be the nurse, but she objected that girls
can be surgeons too, so some things have changed!) After the baby's life was saved, they went back to playing
Naomi's way—showing off the baby to friends. The play styles of Naomi and Eric are equally charming and delightful.
But the plain truth is that "girlish" games offer far better preparation for marriage and family life because they
focus on relationships. As a general rule, boys don't even include games with relationship and domestic themes in
their repertoire. Think about it: While no preschool dress-up corner would be complete without bridal costumes, you
never see tuxedos for little pretend grooms!
Where does this difference in play styles between boys and girls originate? Because it occurs in virtually every
culture, I suspect that it is caused mostly by biology rather than by socialization. But whether nature or nurture
is the cause of these differences, their effect is undeniable. Because their play emphasizes social interactions and
feelings, girls undergo an extensive education into emotions by childhood's end. Boys learn how to pitch overhand. A
boy's experience at playing cooperatively and quickly resolving conflicts will be an asset later in the boardroom or
on the construction site, but it will be a liability in marriage if it comes at the expense of understanding the
emotions behind his wife's perspectives.
This difference in training is heightened by the fact that as they get older, boys rarely play with girls, so they
miss the chance to learn from them. Although about 35 percent of preschool best friendships are between boys and
girls (like Naomi and Eric), by age seven that percentage plummets to virtually 0 percent. From then till puberty
the sexes will have little or nothing to do with each other. This is a worldwide phenomenon. Many explanations have
been given for this voluntary segregation. One intriguing theory, by psychologist Eleanor Maccoby, Ph.D." at
Stanford University, dovetails with my findings on accepting influence. She found that even at very young ages (1/2
years), boys will accept influence only from other boys when they play, whereas girls accept influence equally from
girls or boys. At around ages five to seven, girls become fed up with this state of affairs and stop wanting to play
with boys. From that age until puberty, our culture (and virtually all others) offers no formal structure for
ensuring that boys and girls continue to interact.
By the time Naomi and Eric are grown, the difference in their knowledge of homemaking will be apparent. Once a couple
move in together or get engaged, the groom-to-be is suddenly immersed in what is probably an alien world. In the
Broadway play Defense of the Cave Man, a man says that when he was first married, he saw his wife cleaning the
bathroom and asked her, "Are we moving?" In his bachelor days, that was the only time he and his roommates bothered
to clean the bathroom. Many young husbands discover they have a lot to learn from their wives about maintaining a
home.
Perhaps the fundamental difference between these two kinds of husbands is that the "new" husband has learned that
often in life he needs to yield in order to win. When you drive through any modern city, you encounter frustrating
bottlenecks and unexpected barricades that block your normal and rightful passage. You can take one of two
approaches to these impossible situations. One is to stop, become righteously indignant, and insist that the
offending obstacle move. The other is to drive around it. The first approach will eventually earn you a heart
attack. The second approach--which I call yielding to win--will get you home.
Work through the fun exercises that follow in the book in this chapter. They will help you hone your ability to
share power.
CH 7: The Two Kinds of Marital Conflict
Kind 1: Perpetual problems
Unfortunately, the majority of marital conflicts fall into this category- 69 percent, to be exact. Time and again
when we do four- year follow-ups of couples, we find that they are still arguing about precisely the same issue.
It's as if four minutes have passed rather than four years. They've donned new clothes, altered their hairstyles,
and gained (or lost) a few pounds and wrinkles, but they're still having the same argument. Here are some typical
Perpetual problems that the happy couples in our studies are living with:
1. Meg wants to have a baby, but Donald says he's not ready yet--and doesn't know if he ever will be.
2. Walter wants sex far more frequently than Dana.
3. Chris is lax about housework and rarely does his share of the chores until Susan nags him, which makes him angry.
4. Tony wants to raise their children as Catholics. Jessica is Jewish and wants their children to follow her faith.
5. Angie thinks Ron is too critical of their son. But Ron thinks he has the right approach: Their son has to be
taught the proper way to do things.
Quote: Despite what many therapists will tell you, you don't have to resolve your major marital conflicts for your
marriage to thrive.
In unstable marriages, perpetual problems like these eventually kill the relationship. Instead of coping with the
problem effectively, the couple gets gridlocked over it. They have the same conversation about it over and over
again. They just spin their wheels, resolving nothing. Because they make no headway, they feel increasingly hurt,
frustrated, and rejected by each other. The four horsemen become ever more present when they argue, while humor and
affection become less so. They become all the more entrenched in their positions. Gradually they feel
physiologically overwhelmed. They start a slow process of trying to isolate or enclose this problem area. But
actually they have started becoming emotionally disengaged from each other. They are on the course toward parallel
lives and inevitable loneliness--the death knell of any marriage.
The signs of gridlock
If you're not sure whether you've gridlocked over a perpetual problem or are coping well with it, this checklist will
help. The characteristics of a gridlocked problem are:
· The conflict makes you feel rejected by your partner.
· You keep talking about it but make no headway.
· You become entrenched in your positions and are unwilling to budge.
· When you discuss the subject, you end up feeling more frustrated and hurt.
· Your conversations about the problem are devoid of humor, amusement, or affection.
· You become even more unbudgeable over time, which leads you to vilify each other during these conversations.
· This vilification makes you all the more rooted in your position and polarized, more extreme in your view, and all
the less willing to compromise.
· Eventually you disengage from each other emotionally.
Kind 2: Solvable problems
These problems may sound relatively simple compared with unsolvable ones, but they can cause a great deal of pain
between husband and wife. Just because a problem is solvable doesn't mean it gets resolved. When a solvable problem
causes excessive tension, it's because the couple haven't learned effective techniques for conquering it. They
aren't to blame--far too many of the conflict resolution ideas recommended by marriage manuals and therapists are
not easy to master or apply. Most of these strategies focus on validating your partner's perspective and learning to
be a good listener. There's nothing wrong with this--except that it's very hard for most people to do at any time,
much less when they're distressed.
My fifth principle for making marriage work tackles solvable problems head on. It offers an alternative approach to
conflict resolution based on my research into what goes right when emotionally intelligent couples handle a
disagreement. I will show you how to: (1) Make sure your startup is soft rather than harsh, (2) Learn the effective
use of repair attempts, (3) Monitor your physiology during tense discussions for warning signs of flooding, (4)
Learn how to compromise, and (5) Be more tolerant of each other's imperfections. Follow this advice, and you're
likely to find that solvable problems no longer interfere with your marital happiness.
Telling the difference
If you and your spouse are entrenched in conflict, it may not be obvious which of the two types of disagreement
you're having gridlocked or solvable. One way to identify solvable problems is that they seem less painful,
gut-wrenching, or intense than perpetual, gridlocked ones. That's because when you argue over a solvable problem,
your focus is only on a particular dilemma or situation.
There is no underlying conflict that's fueling your dispute.
Go through this chapter in the book for exploring exercises on identifying solvable and perpetual problems.
The key to all conflict resolution
In the chapters ahead you will find specific techniques that will help you to manage your marital troubles, whether
perpetual or solvable. But first, some overall advice. The basis for coping effectively with either kind of problem
is the same: communicating basic acceptance of your partner's personality Human nature dictates that it is virtually
impossible to accept advice from someone unless you feel that that person understands you. So the bottom-line rule
is that, before you ask your partner to change the way he or she drives, eats, or makes love, you must make your
partner feel that you are understanding.
If either (or both) of you feels judged, misunderstood, or rejected by the other, you will not be able to manage the
problems in your marriage. This holds for big problems and small ones. You may discover that your partner is more
conciliatory during arguments than you realized once you know what to listen for.
It's probably easiest to acknowledge this truth if you think about it from your own perspective. Say you want your
spouse's advice on handling a disagreement you're having with your boss. If your spouse immediately begins
criticizing you and insisting that your boss is right, you're wrong, and what's the matter with you for picking a
fight with your boss anyway, you'd probably regret having brought it up. Most likely you'd get defensive, angry,
offended, hurt, or any combination of these. And yet your spouse might honestly say, "But I was only trying to
help." There's a big difference between "You are such a lousy driver. Would you please slow down before you kill
us?" and "I know how much you enjoy driving fast. But it makes me really nervous when you go over the speed limit.
Could you please slow down?"
Maybe that second approach takes a bit longer. But that extra time is worth it since it is the only approach that
works. It's just a fact that people can change only if they feel that they are basically liked and accepted as they
are. When people feel criticized, disliked, and unappreciated they are unable to change. Instead, they feel under
siege and dig in to protect themselves.
Adults could learn something in this regard from research into child development. We now know that the key to
instilling in children a positive self-image and effective social skills is to communicate to them that we
understand their feelings. Children grow and change optimally when we acknowledge their emotions ("That doggie
scared you," "You're crying because you are sad right now," "You sound very angry. Let's talk about it") rather than
be little or punish them for their feelings ("It's silly to be afraid of such a little dog," "Big boys don't cry,"
"No angry bears allowed in this house--go to your room till you calm down"). When you let a child know that his or
her feelings are okay to have, you are also communicating that the child himself or herself is acceptable even when
sad or crabby or scared. This helps the child to feel good about himself or herself, which makes positive growth and
change possible. The same is true for adults. In order to improve a marriage, we need to feel accepted by our
spouse.
Another important lesson I have learned is that in all arguments, both solvable and perpetual, no one is ever right.
There is no absolute reality in marital conflict, only two subjective realities.
CH 8: Principle 5:
Solve Your Solvable Problems
I have come up with a new model for resolving conflict in a loving relationship. My fifth principle entails the
following steps:
1. Soften your startup
2. Learn to make and receive repair attempts
3. Soothe yourself and each other
4. Compromise
5. Be tolerant of each other's faults
Step 1: Soften your startup
If there's one similarity between happy and unhappy marriages, it's that in both circumstances the wife is far more
likely than the husband to bring up a touchy issue and to push to resolve it. But there's a dramatic difference in
how the wife brings it up.
A soft startup doesn't necessarily have to be diplomatic. It just has to be devoid of criticism or contempt. In a
healthy, volatile marriage, which can be very confrontational, the wife is more likely to say something like "Hey, I
know I can be a slob sometimes myself, but I'm really angry that you walked by the laundry basket last night without
stopping to fold any sheets. I didn't like having to fold them all myself." Or: "I feel really strongly that we need
to go to church together more often. This is very important to me." These are soft startups because they are direct
complaints rather than criticisms or contemptuous accusations.
Softening the startup is crucial to resolving conflicts because, my research finds, discussions invariably end on the
same note they begin. That's why 96 percent of the time I can predict the fate of a conflict discussion in the first
three minutes! If you start an argument harshly--meaning you attack your spouse verbally-you'll end up with at least
as much tension as you began. But if you use a softened startup--meaning you complain but don't criticize or
otherwise attack your spouse--the discussion is likely to be productive. And if most of your arguments start softly,
your marriage is likely to be stable and happy.
Although either spouse can be responsible for a harsh startup, we've found that the vast majority of the time the
culprit is the wife.
This is because in our culture the wife is far more likely than her husband to bring up difficult issues and push to
get them resolved. Husbands are more likely to try to distance themselves from hard to face concerns. As I've noted,
there are physiological reasons for this gender gap. Men tend to experience flooding much more easily because their
bodies are more reactive to emotional stress than their wives'. So they are more inclined to avoid confrontation.
Here are some suggestions to ensure that your startup is soft:
Complain but don't blame. Let's assume that you're angry because your spouse insisted on buying a dog despite
your reservations. He swore up and down that he'd clean up after the dog. But now you're finding poop all over the
yard whenever you take out the garbage. It's certainly okay to complain. You could say something like "Hey there's
poop all over the backyard. We agreed you'd clean up after Banjo. I'm really upset about this." While this is
confrontational, it's not an attack. You're simply complaining about a particular situation, not your partner's
personality or character.
What's not okay is to say something like "Hey, there's poop all over the backyard. This is all your fault. I just
knew you'd be irresponsible about that dog. I should never have trusted you about it in the first place." However
justified you may feel in blaming your spouse, the bottom line is that this approach is not productive.
Even if it does lead your partner to clean up the yard, it also leads to increased tension, resentment,
defensiveness, and so on.
Make statements that start with "I" instead of "You". “I” statements have been a staple of interpersonal psychology
ever since the mid- 1960s, when acclaimed psychologist Harm Ginott noted that phrases starting with / are usually
less likely to be critical and to make the listener defensive than statements starting with you. You can see the
difference:
"You are not listening to me," versus "I would like it if you'd listen to me."
"You are careless with money," versus "I want us to save more."
"You just don't care about me," versus "I'm feeling neglected."
Clearly, the "I" statements above are gentler than their "You" counterparts. Of course, you can also buck this
general rule and come up with "I" statements like "I think you are selfish" that are hardly gentle. So the point is
not to start talking to your spouse in some stilted psycho-babble. Just keep in mind that if your words focus on how
you're feeling rather than on accusing your spouse, your discussion will be far more successful.
Describe what is happening, don't evaluate or judge. Instead of accusing or blaming, just describe what you
see. Instead of "You never watch the baby" say "I seem to be the only one chasing after Charlie today" Again, this
will help prevent your spouse from feeling attacked and waging a defense rather than really considering your point.
Be clear. Don't expect your partner to be a mind reader. Instead of "You left the dining room a total mess,"
say, "I'd appreciate it if you would clean your stuff off the dining room table." Instead of "Would you take care of
the baby for once?" say, "Please change Emmy's diaper and give her a bottle."
Be polite. Add phrases such as "please" and "I would appreciate it if..."
Be appreciative. If your partner has, at some point, handled this situation better, then couch your request
within an appreciation of what your partner did right in the past and how much you miss that now. Instead of "You
never have time for me anymore," say, "Remember how we used to go out every Saturday night? I loved spending so much
time alone with you. And it felt so good knowing that you wanted to be with me, too. Let's start doing that again."
Don't store things up. It's hard to be gentle when you're ready to burst with recriminations. So don't wait
too long before bringing up an issue--otherwise it will just escalate in your mind. As the Bible says (Ephesians
4:26), "Let not the sun go down upon your wrath."
Step 2: Learn to make and receive repair attempts
When you take driving lessons, the first thing you're taught is how to stop the car. Putting on the brakes is an
important skill in a marriage, too. When your discussion starts off on the wrong foot, or you find yourself in an
endless cycle of recriminations, you can prevent a disaster if you know how to stop. I call these brakes repair
attempts.
When Michael gets defensive and says, "I definitely clean off the counters in the kitchen and the table whenever we
do stuff," Justine doesn't immediately discount his point. "Hmm-hmm, you do," she says. This is a repair attempt. It
deescalates the tension so that Michael is more receptive to finding a compromise. What separates stable,
emotionally intelligent marriages from others is not that their repair attempts are necessarily more skillful or
better thought out, but that their repair attempts get through to their spouse. This is because the air between them
hasn't been clouded by a lot of negativity.
Getting the message through
As I said, the key factor in whether a repair attempt is effective is the state of the relationship. In happy
marriages, couples send and receive repair attempts with ease. In unhappy ones, even the most eloquent repair
attempt can fall on deaf ears. But now that you know this, you can "buck the system." You don't have to wait for
your marriage to improve before you start hearing each other's repair attempts. Start now by focusing intently on
these "brakes" and training each other to recognize when one is sent your way. Do this, and you can pull yourselves
out of the downward cycle of negativity. Your future together can be bright even if your disagreements tend to be
very negative. The secret is learning the right kind of damage control.
One reason couples miss each other's repair attempts is that they don't always come sugarcoated. If your spouse
yells, "You're getting off the topic!" or grumbles, "Can we take a break?" that's a repair attempt despite the
negative delivery. If you listen to your partner's tone rather than the words, you could miss his real message,
which is "Stop! This is getting out of hand." Because repair attempts can be difficult to hear if your relationship
is engulfed in negativity, the best strategy is to make your attempts obviously formal in order to emphasize them.
Below you'll find a long list of scripted phrases. These are specific words you can say to your spouse to deescalate
the tension. By using them when arguments get too negative, you'll be able to keep your discussions from spiraling
out of control. Some couples even copy this list and stick it on their refrigerator for handy reference.
Many, if not all, of these phrases probably sound phony and unnatural to you right now. That's because they offer a
very different way of speaking with your spouse when you're upset. But their phoniness is not a reason to reject
them. If you learned a better and more effective way to hold your tennis racket, it would feel "wrong" and
"unnatural" initially, simply because you weren't used to it yet. The same goes for these repair attempts. Over time
they'll come easily to you, and you'll modify them to more closely suit your style of speech and personality.
I Feel
1. I'm getting scared.
2. Please say that more gently
3. Did I do something wrong?
4. That hurt my feelings.
5. That felt like an insult.
6. I'm feeling sad.
7. I feel blamed. Can you rephrase that?
8. I'm feeling unappreciated.
9. Feel defensive. Can you rephrase that?
10. Please don't lecture me.
11. Don’t feel like you understand me right now.
12. I am starting to feel Hooded.
13. Feel criticized. Can you rephrase that?
14. I'm getting worried
I Need to Calm Down
1. Can you make things safer for me?
2. I need things to be calmer right now.
3. I need your support right now.
4. Just listen to me right now and try to understand.
5. Tell me you love me.
6. Can I have a kiss?
7. Can I take that back?
8. Please be gentler with me.
9. Please help me calm down.
10. Please be quiet and listen to me.
11. This is important to me. Please listen.
12. I need to finish what I was saying.
13. I am starting to feel flooded.
14. I feel criticized. Can you rephrase that?
15. Can we take a break?
Sorry
1. My reactions were too extreme. Sorry.
2. I really blew that one.
3. Let me try again.
4. I want to be gentler to you right now, and I don't know how.
5. Tell me what you hear me saying.
6. I can see my part in all this.
7. How can I make things better?
8. Let's try that over again.
9. What you are saying is...
10. Let me start again in a softer way.
11. I'm sorry. Please forgive me.
Get to Jes
1. You're starting to convince me.
2. I agree with part of what you're saying.
3. Let's compromise here.
4. Let's find our common ground.
5. I never thought of things that way
6. This problem is not very serious in the big picture.
7. I think your point of view makes sense.
8. Let's agree to include both our views in a solution.
9. I am thankful for . . .
10. One thing I admire about you is...
11. I see what you're talking about.
Stop Action!
1. I might be wrong here.
2. Please, let's stop for a while.
3. Let's take a break.
4. Give me a moment. I'll be back.
5. I'm feeling flooded.
6. Please stop.
7. Let's agree to disagree here.
8. Let's start all over again.
9.Hang in there. Don’t withdraw.
10.I want to change the topic.
11.We are getting off track.
I Appreciate
1. I know this isn’t your fault.
2. My part of this problem is…
3. I see your point.
4. Thank you for…
5. That’s good point.
6. We are both saying…
7. I understand.
8. I love you.
9. I am thankful for…
10.One thing I admire about you is…
11.This is not your problem, it’s our problem.
Formalizing repair attempts by using these scripted phrases can help you defuse arguments in two ways. First, the
formality of a script ensures that you will use the type of words that work well for putting on the brakes. Second,
these phrases are like megaphones they help ensure that you pay attention to a repair attempt when you're on the
receiving end.
Step 3: soothe yourself and each other
While Justine is in the middle of discussing laundry with Michael, he does something that seems incidental but really
has great significance for their chances of a happy future: He yawns. Cleaning house is not the most fascinating
subject, but Michael doesn’t yawn because Justine is boring him. He yawns because he is relaxed. When you’re feeling
angry or anxious, yawning is just about the least likely physiological reaction you’re going to have. Michael’s yawn
is like an announcement that he’s feeling soothed by Justine, even though she’s discussing an area of conflict.
Because no alarms are going off in his body (or mind), he is able to discuss housework and reach a compromise with
Justine easily.
In less stable marriages, however, conflict discussions can lead to the opposite reaction—they can trigger flooding.
When this occurs, you feel overwhelmed both emotionally and physically. Most likely you think thoughts of righteous
indignation (“I don’t have to take this anymore”) or innocent victim hood (“Why is she always picking on me?”).
Meanwhile, your body is in distress. Usually your heart is pounding, you’re sweating, you’re holding your breath.
I have found that in the vast majority of cases, when one spouse does not “get” the other’s repair attempt, it’s
because the listener is flooded and therefore can’t really hear what the spouse is saying. When you’re in this
condition, the most thoughtful repair attempt in the world won’t benefit your marriage.
To comfort each other, you first need to talk earnestly about flooding.
Ask yourself and each other these questions:
· What makes me (you) feel flooded?
· How do I (you) typically bring up issues or irritability or complaints?
· Do I (you) store things up?
· Is there anything I can do that soothes you?
· Is there anything you can do that soothes me?
· What signals can we develop for letting the other know when we feel flooded? Can we take breaks?
If your heart rate exceeds 100 beats per minute you won't be able to hear what your spouse is trying to tell you no
matter how hard you try. Take a twenty-minutes break before continuing.
Follow this chapter in the book for exercises on soothing each other.
Step 4: compromise
Like it or not, the only solution to marital problems is to find a compromise. In an intimate, loving relationship it
just doesn't work for either of you to get things all your way, even if you're convinced that you're right. This
approach would create such inequity and unfairness that the marriage would suffer.
Usually, though both partners do make an earnest effort to compromise on issues, they fail because they go about
trying to compromise in the wrong way. Negotiation is possible only after you've followed the steps above--softening
startup, repairing your discussion, and keeping calm. These prime you for compromise by getting you into a positive
mode.
Before you try to resolve a conflict, remember that the cornerstone of any compromise is the fourth principle of
marriage accepting influence. This means that for a compromise to work, you can't have a closed mind to your
spouse's opinions and desires. You don't have to agree with everything your spouse says or believes, but you have to
be honestly open to considering his or her position. That's what accepting influence is really all about. If you
find yourself sitting with your arms folded and shaking your head no (or just thinking it) when your spouse is
trying to talk out a problem with you, your discussion will never get anywhere.
As I've said, men have a harder time accepting influence from their wives than vice versa. But whatever your gender,
an inability to be open minded is a real liability when it comes to conflict resolution. So if you haven't already,
work through the exercises in Chapter 6. Realize that it may take time and continued self-awareness to break out of
this tendency. Your spouse can assist you in seeing things from his or her perspective. Ask your spouse questions to
help you see his or her point of view. Remember to search for the part of your spouse's perspective that, by
objective standards, is reasonable.
Once you're ready, there's nothing magical about finding a solution you both can live with. Often compromise is just
a matter of talking out your differences and preferences in a systematic way This is not difficult to do as long as
you continue to follow the steps above to prevent your discussion from becoming overwhelmingly negative.
Follow this chapter in the book for exercises on compromising with each other.
Step 5: Be tolerant of each other's faults
CH 9: Coping with Typical Solvable Problems
Work stress, in-laws, money, sex, housework, a new baby: These are the most typical areas of marital conflict, so
there's a good chance at least some of them are hot buttons in your relationship. Even in very happy and stable
marriages, these issues are perennials. Although every relationship is different, there's a reason why these
particular conflicts are so common: They touch upon some of the marriage's most important work.
Many people pay lip service to the notion that a good marriage takes "work." But what specifically does this mean?
Every marriage is faced with certain emotional tasks that husband and wife need to accomplish together for the
marriage to grow and deepen. These tasks come down to attaining a rich understanding between husband and wife. A
marriage needs this understanding in order for both people to feel safe and secure in it. When these tasks are not
accomplished, the marriage feels not like a port in the storm of life but just another storm.
When there's conflict in one of these six common areas, usually it's because husband and wife have different ideas
about these tasks, their importance, or how they should be accomplished. If the conflict is perpetual, no amount of
problem-solving savvy will fix it.
The tension will deescalate only when you both feel comfortable living with your ongoing difference. But when the
issue is solvable, the challenge is to find the right strategy for conquering it. (If you're not sure whether your
conflict is solvable or perpetual, see page 134.)
Here we've listed these six hot spots, the task they each represent for a marriage, and practical advice for
addressing the solvable disagreements they often trigger.
Stress and more stress
The task: Making your marriage a place of peace.
Scheduling formal griping sessions can prevent the spillover of everyday stress into your marriage.
Relations with in-laws
The task: Establishing a sense of "we-ness," or solidarity, between husband and wife.
Money, money, money
The task: Balancing the freedom and empowerment money represents with the security and trust it also symbolizes.
Sex
The task: Fundamental appreciation and acceptance of each other.
Housework
The task: Creating a sense of fairness and teamwork.
Becoming parents
The task: Expanding your sense of "ire-ness" to include your children.
CH 10: Principle 6:
Overcome Gridlock
You want to have children, he doesn’t. She wants you to attend church with her, you’re an atheist. He’s a ho,ebody,
you’re ready for a party every night. If you feel hopelessly gridlocked over a problem that just can’t be solved, it
can be cold comfort to know that other couples handle similar conflict with aplomb, treating them the way they would
a bad back or allergies. When you’re gridlocked, trying to view your differences as a kind of psychological trick
knee that you can learn to cope with may seem impossible. But you can do it.
The goal in ending gridlock is not to solve the problem, but rather to move from gridlock to dialogue. The gridlock
conflict will probably always be a perpetual issue in your marriage, but one day you will be able to talk about it
without hurting each other. You will learn to live with the problem.
To navigate your way out of gridlock, you have to first understand its cause. Whether the issue is momentous, like
which of your religions to pass on your children, or ridiculous, like which way to fold dinner napkins, gridlock is
sign that you have dreams for your life that aren’t being addressed or respected by each other. By dreams I mean the
hopes, aspirations, and wishes that are part of your identity and give purpose and meaning to your life.
Dreams can operate at many different levels. Some are very practical (such as wanting to achieve a certain amount of
savings), but others are profound. Often these deeper dreams remain hidden while the more mundane dreams piggyback
on top of them and are easier to see. For example, underneath the dream to make lots of money may be a deep need for
security.
What dreams are made of?
Often our deepest dreams are rooted in childhood. You may long to re-create some of your warmest memories of family
life from your youth--such as having dinner together every night without interruptions from the TV or telephone. Or,
you may feel the psychological need to distance yourself from painful childhood memories by not duplicating the same
activities. For example, you may resist having family dinners if the evening meal in your childhood home was often
the scene of hostility between your parents that left you with indigestion.
Here is a list of some common "deep" dreams expressed by couples I've worked with.
1. A sense of freedom
2. The experience of peace
3. Unity with nature
4. Exploring who I am
5. Adventure
6. A spiritual journey
7. Justice
8. Honor
9. Unity with my past
10. Healing
11. Knowing my family
12. Becoming all I can be
13. Having a sense of power
14. Dealing with growing older
15. Exploring a creative side of myself
16. Becoming more powerful
17. Getting over past hurts
18. Becoming more competent
19. Asking God for forgiveness
20. Exploring an old part of myself I have lost
21. Getting over a personal hang-up
22. Having a sense of order
23. Being able to be productive
24. A place and a time to just "be"
25. Being able to truly relax
26. Reflecting on my life
27. Getting my priorities in order
28. Finishing something important
29. Exploring the physical side of myself
30. Being able to compete and win
31. Travel
32. Quietness
33. Atonement
34. Building something important
35. Ending a chapter of my life--saying good-bye to something
All of these dreams are beautiful. None of them are inherently bad for a marriage. But they can cause problems if
they are hidden or not respected by your spouse. When this occurs, you may either have open battles over the issue,
or it may go underground and be expressed symbolically. In the latter case, the couple may think they are at
loggerheads over whether to go out to dinner every Sunday night, but the bottom-line issue has to do with something
much deeper than a restaurant meal. Sunday night holds a special place in both of their hearts, stemming from their
childhoods. Her dream is to eat out because her family did that every Sunday, a treat that made her feel special.
But for her husband, a restaurant meal was always much less of a treat than having his very busy mother cook for the
family--something she only did on Sundays. So the question of a restaurant versus a home meal is really symbolic of
what makes each of them feel loved.
You may find that when you first begin to recognize and acknowledge your dreams, the problem between you and your
spouse seems to get worse rather than better. Be patient. Acknowledging and advocating for your dreams in a marriage
is not easy The very nature of gridlock means that your dream and your spouse's appear to be in opposition, so
you've both become deeply entrenched in your positions and fear accepting each other's influence and yielding.
Once you're ready to overcome gridlock, here's how to proceed.
Step 1: Become a dream detective
Often, deeply personal dreams go unspoken or underground after marriage because we assume they must in order to make
the relationship work. It's common for both partners not to feel entitled to their complaints. They may see their
own desires as "childish" or "impractical." But such labels don't change the fact that the dream is something you
long for, and if the marriage doesn't honor it, conflict will almost inevitably ensue. In other words, when you
adjust to marriage by burying a dream, it just resurfaces in disguised form-as a gridlocked conflict.
Step 2: Work on a gridlocked marital issue.
Now that you have had some practice uncovering dreams, try it with your own marriage. Choose a particular gridlocked
conflict to work on. Then write an explanation of your position. Don't criticize or blame your spouse. Use the
statements made by the couples above as your guide--notice that they don't bad-mouth each other. Instead, they focus
on what each partner needs, wants, and is feeling about the situation. Next, write the story of the hidden dreams
that underlie your position. Explain where these dreams come from and why they are so meaningful to you.
Once you both understand which dreams are fueling the gridlock, it's time to talk about them. Each person gets
fifteen minutes as the speaker and fifteen minutes as the listener. Do not try to solve this problem. Attempting to
do that now is likely to backfire. Your goal is simply to understand why each of you feels so strongly about this
issue.
Step 3: Soothe each other
Discussing dreams that are in opposition can be stressful. Since you'll accomplish nothing if either of you becomes
flooded, take a break for some soothing before you attempt to slog through the gridlock. See the exercises in
Chapter 8 ("Soothe Yourself and Each other")
Step 4: End the gridlock
Now it's time to begin the ongoing task of making peace with this issue, accepting the differences between you, and
establishing some kind of initial compromise that will help you continue to discuss the problem amicably. Understand
that your purpose is not to solve the conflict--it will probably never go away completely instead, the goal is to
"declaw" the issue, to try to remove the hurt so the problem stops being a source of great pain.
Step 5: Say thank you
It may take more than one session to overcome gridlock on issues that have been deeply troubling to your marriage.
These sessions can be stressful, no matter how diligently you attempt to accept each other's viewpoint without
judgment.
Go through these steps in the book for a detailed execution of each step.
CH 11: Principle 7:
Create Shared Meaning
“We used to have a yuppie marriage," says Helen. "By that I mean it was very superficial. We got along okay and
really loved each other, but I didn't feel that connected to Kevin. It was like we were roommates who made love."
Helen, who calls herself a "devout feminist," had always prided herself on her independence. At first she thought it
was great that she and Kevin had their own lives--their own careers, interests, and friends. But the longer they
were married, and especially after they had children, the more she felt something was lacking. She didn't want to
give up her strong sense of individual identity, but she wanted more from her marriage. After attending our
workshop, she realized what it was: She wanted to feel more like she and Kevin were a family.
If your marriage adheres to my first six principles, there's a good chance that your relationship is stable and happy
but if you find yourself asking, "Is that all there is?" your situation may be similar to Helen and Kevin's. What
may be missing is a deeper sense of shared meaning. Marriage isn't just about raising kids, splitting chores, and
making love. It can also have a spiritual dimension that has to do with creating an inner life together -- a culture
rich with symbols and rituals, and an appreciation for your roles and goals that link you, that lead you to
understand what it means to be a pan of the family you have become.
Usually when we think of culture, we think in terms of large ethnic groups or even countries where particular customs
and cuisine prevail. But a culture can also be created by just two people who have agreed to share their lives. In
essence, each couple and each family create its own micro culture. And like other cultures these small units have
their customs (like Sunday dinner out), rituals (like a champagne toast after the birth of each baby), and
myths--the stories the couple tell themselves (whether true, false, or embellished) that explain their sense of what
their marriage is like, what it means to be part of their group.
Developing a culture doesn't mean a couple sees eye to eye on every aspect of their life's philosophy. Instead there
is a meshing. They find a way of honoring each other's dreams even if they don't always share them. The culture that
they develop together incorporates both of their dreams. And it is flexible enough to change as husband and wife
grow and develop. When a marriage has this shared sense of meaning, conflict is much less intense and perpetual
problems are unlikely to lead to gridlock.
It is certainly possible to have a stable marriage without sharing a deep sense of what is meaningful about your
lives together. Your marriage can "work" even if your dreams aren't in sync. The last chapter showed you just how to
navigate your way around perpetual problems so that you can live with them rather than ending up gridlocked. It is
important to accept that you each will probably have some dreams that the other doesn't share but can respect. You
may, for example, adhere to different religions but have enough respect for each other's spiritual journey to bridge
the differences in your faiths. But it is also true that a rewarding marriage is about more than sidestepping
conflict. The more you can agree about the fundamentals in life, the richer, more meaningful, and in a sense easier
your marriage is likely to be. You certainly can't force yourselves to have the same deeply held views. But some
coming together on these issues is likely to occur naturally if you are open to each other's perspectives. A crucial
goal of any marriage, therefore, is to create an atmosphere that encourages each person to talk honestly about his
or her convictions. The more you speak candidly and respectfully with each other, the more likely there is to be a
blending of your sense of meaning.
As I said, the more shared meaning you can find, the deeper, richer, and more rewarding your relationship will be.
Along the way you'll also be strengthening your marital friendship--as emphasized in my first three principles of a
happy marriage. This in turn will make it even easier to cope with any conflicts that crop up. That's the beauty of
the Seven Principles. They form a feedback loop that ensures that as you work on each principle, it becomes easier
to work on the others.
Thinking Behavior
There are only two sorts of thinking behavior:
1. YOU WANT TO THINK: You have a way of doing something, there are no problems and you can carry on doing things in exactly the same way — but you want to see if there is a better way. Could it be done faster? Could it be done in a simpler way? Could it be done at less cost? Could it be done with less errors, wastage, pollution, danger etc.? These are the key questions that are asked in any improvement exercise. This sort of thinking is extremely important in business, in engineering, in government etc. where there is an emphasis on efficiency, effectiveness and cost cutting. The same thing applies almost as much to personal life. The difficulty is that you are not forced to do this thinking but have to want to do it.
2. YOU HAVE TO THINK: There is a problem you cannot solve. There is a dilemma that makes it difficult to reach a decision. There is a conflict that is growing worse. There is a need for a new idea and you cannot get one. You need to find an opportunity but cannot do so. In short you are stuck. You cannot move ahead. You have no choice. You have to think. There is no routine way of tackling the situation. Ordinary thinking will not help you. You have to think hard.
~ * ~
WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT OUR BRAIN, A SELF ORGANIZING SYSTEM?
If the brain sets up patterns, what can we do? Do we not just have to follow the patterns?
Imagine a slope. You place a ball at the top of the slope and the ball rolls down the slope. The ball is rolling down the slope on its own — but you have chosen to place the ball at the top of the slope.
Imagine that the slope is quite wide and at the bottom there is a matchbox. Your task is to knock the matchbox over. You cannot just place the ball anywhere at the top of the slope. You choose a position such that the rolling ball will hit the matchbox.
In exactly the same way, thinking is a combination of what the mind does and what we set it up to do.
Add up the numbers 5 + 11 + 16. That is easy enough. Some people might find it easier if the numbers were arranged one under the other (see the image below). Some very young people might find it easier if they were put down as dots in a row and then you just count all the dots. In this example we see how we can arrange things so that the mind finds it easier to work.
If you are asked to tell which of two similar square shapes is the bigger you might have a hard job estimating the difference. But if you are able to place one square over the other, you can instantly see which is the bigger. Again we have re-arranged things to make the mind's task easier.
~ * ~
Carpenters and Thinkers
My favorite model for a thinker is that of the carpenter. Carpenters do things. Carpenters make things. Carpenters do things step by step. Carpenters deal with the physical substance of wood — so we can see what they are doing.
So the model of the carpenter provides us with all the elements of thinking skill that I shall be describing in this book.
ATTITUDES: The attitudes with which we approach thinking.
PRINCIPLES: The guiding principles that make for good thinking.
HABITS: The routines we seek to make automatic.
BASIC OPERATIONS: The fundamental operations of thinking.
TOOLS: The thinking tools we practice and use deliberately.
STRUCTURES: Formats in which we hold things for convenience. Always keep in mind the model of the carpenter as he or she goes about constructing things.
~ * ~
GOOD ATTITUDES
... Everyone has to think — everyone can think.
... Thinking is a skill that can be developed.
... I am a thinker.
... I can get better and better at thinking.
... Thinking may require a deliberate effort.
... Things that appear complicated at first can often be made more simple.
... Take one step at a time.
... Separate your ego from your thinking. Look at your thinking objectively.
... The purpose of thinking is not to be right all the time.
... Listening and learning is a key part of thinking.
... Always be humble - arrogance is the mark of a poor thinker.
... Thinking should be constructive, not negative. It is not enough to attack and to prove the other party wrong. Start out trying to be constructive and to take things further.
... Explore a subject instead of arguing about it.
... The other party in an argument usually has something useful and constructive to say, if you make the effort to pick this out. Instead of just looking for points of attack, try to see what is of value in an opposing position.
... People with differing points of view are usually right according to their own special perception. Instead of considering others stupid try to see their perception and why they hold the view they hold.
... It is possible to be creative and to have new ideas.
... Do not be afraid to try out ideas.
... At any point in thinking there may be alternatives that you have not yet thought of.
... Avoid dogmatism even when you do feel that you are right.
~ * ~
THE SIX THINKING HATS
The six thinking hats is a method for doing one sort of thinking at a time. Instead of trying to do everything at once we 'wear' only one hat at a time. There are six colored hats and each color represents a type of thinking.
WHITE HAT: Facts, figures and information. What information do we have? What information do we need to get?
RED HAT: Emotions, feelings, hunches and intuition. What do I feel about this matter right now?
BLACK HAT: Caution. Truth. Judgement. Fitting the facts. Does this fit the facts? Will it work? Is it safe? Can it be
done?
YELLOW HAT: Advantages, benefits, savings. Why it can be done. Why there are benefits. Why it is a good thing to do?
GREEN HAT: Exploration, proposals, suggestions, new ideas. Alter-natives for action. What can we do here? Are there
some different ideas?
BLUE HAT: Thinking about thinking. Control of the thinking process.
ROLE-PLAYING
... 'Let's have four minutes green-hat thinking on this.'
... 'What are the facts? Some white-hat thinking, please.'
... 'Be realistic. Put on your black hat'
... 'Switch from the black hat to the yellow hat for the moment.'
USE OF THE HATS
1. YOURSELF:
You can choose to put on a hat in order to tell others the sort of thinking you are going to do.
... 'Putting on my black hat I am going to point out what is wrong with the idea...'
... 'I am going to put on my red hat because I have a hunch this is all a trick. I do not know why but that is my
hunch’
... 'Putting on my green hat I want to put forward a new idea. Why don't we let people buy their motor-cycles from
us?'
... 'I want to do some yellow-hat thinking here. There are the following good points about the idea...'
... 'We do not seem to be getting anywhere. Putting on my blue hat I suggest we make clear what we are trying to do.'
2. SOMEONE ELSE: When talking to someone else you can ask that person to put on a particular hat, to take off a
particular hat or to switch hats. This allows you to request a change in thinking —without offending the other
person.
... 'Please give me your black-hat thinking on this matter. We do not want to make any mistake.'
... 'Never mind what we can do. I just want some white-hat thinking. What are the facts?'
... 'That is what you feel about it. Now take off your red hat.'
... 'I am going to ask you to switch from black-hat thinking to some yellow-hat thinking.’
3. GROUP: When working with a group the leader of the group, or anyone else, can ask individuals in the group – or
the whole group – to put on, take off, or switch hats. This use is similar to use with one other person - except
that more people are involved.
... 'Let's all try three minutes of green-hat thinking’
... I want to know what you all really feel about this project - so some red-hat thinking from each one of you.'
...'l think we need some white-hat thinking here. Do you all agree?'
... 'Some blue-hat thinking, please. Suggestions on the direction our thinking should take.'
MENTAL IMAGES FOR REMEMBERING THE HATS:
White hat: Think of blank paper. Think of a computer print-out. The white hat means neutral information. It is not a
matter of argument or making suggestions. White-hat thinking focuses directly on the available information.
Information is very important for thinking, so it is useful to have a way of being able to focus directly on
information. Under the white hat there are three key questions:
1. What information do we have?
2. What information is missing?
3. How do we get the information we need?
RED HAT
Think of fire and warm. The red hat is for emotions, feelings, hunches and intuition.
In a way the red hat is the opposite of the white hat. The white hat seeks to put down the objective facts and is not
interested in what anyone feels about them - facts are facts. The red hat is not interested in the facts but only in
people’s feelings.
BLACK HAT
Think of a stern judge. Think of someone who gives you a black mark if you get something wrong.
The black hat is certainly the most used of all the hats. In some ways it is also the most valuable of the hats. The
black hat prevents us from making mistakes and doing silly things.
The black hat is concerned with truth and reality. The black hat is the hat of critical thinking: Is this right?'
Under the black hat come a number of questions:
1. Is it true?
2. Does it fit?
3. Will it work?
4. What are the dangers and problems?
YELLOW HAT:
Think of sunshine and optimism. The yellow hat is full of hope but as it is a logical hat the reasons behind the hope
must be given.
In general, the yellow hat is looking forward into the future: 'If we do this, then these benefits will arise...’
The yellow hat can also be used for looking backwards into the past: 'This thing happened. There were a lot of
harmful effects. But there were also some good effects — let's put on our yellow hat to find the good effects.'
The yellow-hat thinker asks himself or herself the following questions:
1. What are the benefits?
2. Why should it work?
GREEN HAT
Think of grass, trees, vegetation and growth. Think of the energy of growth and fertility. Think of shoots and
branches.
The green hat is the 'active' hat.
The green hat is the hat for creative thinking. In fact, the green hat covers both uses of the word ‘creative'.
1. Creative thinking may mean bringing something about or making something happen. This is similar to constructive
thinking. The green hat is concerned with proposals and suggestions.
2. Creative thinking may mean new ideas, new alternatives, new solutions, new inventions. Here the emphasis is on
‘newness'.
The white hat lays out the information.
The red hat allows feelings to be put forward.
The black and yellow hats deal with logical assessment. So it falls to the green hat to be the action hat under which
ideas are put forward.
When you are asked to put on the green hat you are being asked to come up with suggestions and ideas. This is active
thinking, not reactive thinking.
The five main uses of the green hat are as following:
1. Exploration
2. Proposals and suggestions
3. Alternatives
4. New ideas
5. Provocations
BLUE HAT
Think of the blue sky. The sky is above everything. If you were up in the sky you would be looking down at everything
below. With blue-hat thinking you are above the thinking: you are looking down at the thinking. With blue-hat
thinking you are thinking about thinking.
The blue hat is the overview. The blue hat is the process control. The blue hat is like the conductor of the
orchestra. With all the other hats we think about the subject matter, but with the blue hat we think about our
thinking.
The blue hat covers the following points:
1. Where are we now?
2. What is the next step?
3. Program for thinking
4. Summary
5. Observation and comment
~ * ~
SEQUENCIAL USE OF HATS:
What is the correct sequence in which the six hats could be used?
There is no single correct sequence because the sequence Will vary with the circumstances. You are free to make up
your own sequence but some rules or guidelines are given here.
1. Each hat may be used any number of times in the sequence.
2. In general it is best to use the yellow hat before the black hat since it is difficult to be positive after you
have been critical.
3. The black hat is used in two ways. The first way is to point out the weaknesses in an idea. This should then be
followed by the green hat, which tries to overcome the weakness. The second use of the black hat is for assessment.
4. The black hat is always used for final assessment of the idea. This final assessment should always be followed by
the red hat. This is so that we can see how we feel about the idea after we have assessed it.
5. If you believe that there are strong feelings about a subject, you would always start the thinking with the red
hat in order to get those feelings out into the open.
6. If there are no strong feelings you would start with the white hat in order to collect information. After the
white hat you would use the green hat to generate some alternatives. Then you would assess each alternative with the
yellow hat followed by the black hat. You would then choose an alternative and finally assess your choice with the
black hat followed by the red hat.
The major difference in sequence is between the two situations: seeking an idea; reacting to an idea.
Seeking an Idea:
The sequence of hat colors might be:
WHITE: To gather available information.
GREEN: For further exploration and to generate alternatives.
YELLOW: To assess the benefits and feasibility of each alternative.
BLACK: To assess the weaknesses and dangers of each alternative.
GREEN: To develop further the most promising alternatives and to make a choice.
BLUE: To summarize and assess what has been achieved so far.
BLACK: To make the final judgement on the chosen alternative.
RED: To find out the feelings on the outcome.
Reacting to a Presented Idea:
Here the sequence is different because the idea is known and, usually, the background information is also known.
RED: To find out the existing feelings about the idea.
YELLOW: To make an effort to find the benefits in the idea.
BLACK: To point out weaknesses, problems and dangers in the idea.
GREEN: To see if the idea can be modified to strengthen the yellow-hat benefits and to overcome the black-hat
problems.
WHITE: To see if available information can help in modifying the idea to make it more acceptable (if the red-hat
feelings are against the idea).
GREEN: Development of the final suggestion.
BLACK: Judgement of the final suggestion.
RED: To find out the feelings on the outcome.
Short Sequences:
Quite often short sequences of the hats are used for various purposes.
YELLOW/BLUE/RED: For quick assessment of an idea.
WHITE/GREEN: To generate ideas.
BLACK/GREEN: To improve an existing idea.
BLUE/GREEN: To summarize and spell out the alternatives.
BLUE/YELLOW: To see if the thinking has had any benefits.
~ * ~
TOOLS FOR THINKING >>>
OUTCOME AND CONCLUSION
... 'You have been thinking for twenty minutes — what is the outcome?'
... 'The five minutes' thinking time is up — what is the outcome?'
... This meeting has gone on for three hours. We have had a lot of discussion. What is the outcome?'
In general, there seem to be two possible answers to that question:
... 'Here is the solution to the problem. Here is the answer. Here is the decision. Here is the conclusion.'
... We do not seem to have gotten anywhere at all.
When the thinking has to come to an end what is the outcome? Is it just a matter of either a specific answer or
nothing at all? If there is not the specific answer, have we been wasting our time?
If you do not seem to be getting anywhere then thinking is not enjoyable. So it is important to pay attention to the
outcome of any thinking. The outcome is not just a matter of right answer or no answer. There are many possible
outcomes of thinking, but we can simplify them into three types of outcome:
1. Better map (exploration)
2. Pin-pointing needs
3. Specific answer
BETTER MAP
At the end of your thinking you should have a better map of what you have been thinking about. If nothing else, you
have gone over the territory. You have explored. You have a better idea of the information, concepts and feelings in
the matter.
PIN-POINTING NEEDS
After thinking about a matter you should have a much clearer idea about why you cannot go further, about why you
cannot reach a conclusion.
It may be that there is a need for some vital information and you cannot proceed without that.
SPECIFIC ANSWER
This means that you have come to a conclusion; have reached a decision; have arrived at a design; have a specific
plan or strategy; have a solution to the problem; have an answer to the question.
~ * ~
THE FIVE-MINUTE THINKING FORMAT
One Minute
- Be clear about the purpose of the thinking
- Be clear about the focus
- Be clear about the sort of outcome you need
- Be clear about the situation
Next Two Minutes
First of all, you explore the subject in terms of information and your own experience. Then you start to have some
ideas.
- Is there an obvious answer?
- What are the usual answers here?
- In very broad terms what would I like to do?
- How can I put that wish into practical action?
- What other ways are there?
Next One Minute
This is the stage of choosing or deciding.
- What alternative is most likely to work?
- Which alternative would be most acceptable in practice?
- Which alternative best fits my needs and priorities?
- Which alternative best fits the circumstances of this thinking exercise?
Final One Minute
If you have reached a conclusion, answer or decision, test it out by going through the reasons why you think it will
work. You may have time to compare it with other possible solutions to show why the one you chose is better.
If you do not have a final conclusion, you should spend this minute defining the outcome of your thinking in another
way.
What have you learned through thinking about the subject?
What alternatives have you considered (even if you could not decide between them)?
What alternative approaches might there be — even if these are not solutions?
What further information you really need?
What are the sticky points?
What are the key problems?
Output:
At the end of the five minutes you must be able to give your output. You must be able to do this directly without
waiting to be asked questions.
~ * ~
FORWARD OR PARALLEL
There are two main directions of thinking: forward or parallel.
You can walk along the path, or you can pause and look around at the garden.
In forward thinking if we are at A we move forward to B and then to C. If we have both A and B, then we move forward
to C. In other words, where we get to is determined by where we are now.
In parallel thinking we have A and then B and then C, all in parallel. They are not determined by each other. They
exist in parallel. We can look around to find them.
There is food on the table. And we are hungry. So let us sit down to eat. This is forward thinking.
In parallel thinking we might say: there is bread on the table; there is butter on the table; there is soup on the
table etc., etc. All these exist in parallel.
Strangers standing around in a crowd are parallel. A woman moving towards someone she recognizes as a friend is
'forward'.
The key question for parallel thinking is: What else is there?
This means what other things, what other alternatives. What other points of view, what other perceptions etc.?
The key question for forward thinking is:
So what follows?
If we have 'this' then what follows? Where do we go from here? What can we deduce?
It is obvious that 5+3 give the answer 8. That is forward thinking.
The answer 8 could have been the result of 5+3. But it could also have been the result of 4+4, 7+1 and 6+2. This is
parallel thinking.
We use parallel thinking for exploring both what is there and also possibilities.
We use forward thinking for going forward to solutions or conclusions.
The two key questions to ask as a habit of thinking are:
- “What else might there be?”
- “So what follows?”
~ * ~
LOGIC AND PERCEPTION
Perception is how we see the world around us.
Logic is how we make the best use of those perceptions.
The two main aspects of perception are: breadth and change.
So the key habit questions to ask are:
- How broad a view am I taking?
- In what other ways is it possible to look at things?
One shoe salesman wrote: “This is a terrible market – no one wears shoes.” The other salesman wrote: “This is a
wonderful market – no one wears shoes.”
~ * ~
CAF: Consider All Factors
CAF is an attention-directing tool. CAF is a tool designed to increase the breadth of perception. What are the
factors that have to be considered in this matter?
The more you use the tool in a deliberate manner the more of a tool it becomes. If you are shy about mentioning the
tool, it does not become usable as a tool but remains as a weak attitude.
~ * ~
APC: Alternatives, Possibilities, Choices
This is another attention directing tool. Instead of moving ‘forward’ with our thinking we look at ‘parallel’
possibilities.
There are many sorts of alternatives:
PERCEPTION: The same thing can be looked at in many different ways.
ACTION: Alternative courses of action that can be taken in a situation.
SOLUTIONS: Alternative solutions to a problem.
APPROACHES: Different ways of tackling the problem in order to find a solution.
EXPLANATIONS: Alternative explanations of how something happened. Alternative hypotheses in science.
DESIGN: Alternative designs, each of which fulfils the purpose of the design (machines, buildings, posters etc.).
Sometimes we are forced to look for alternatives because the traditional way does not work. Sometimes we want to look
for alternatives because we believe we might find a better way than the one we now use. If someone tells you that
there are only two possible solutions to a problem, you might spend a few moments thinking of further alternatives.
You may or may not find further alternatives, but it is always worth spending some time looking for them.
Perhaps the most difficult thing to do is to stop to look for alternatives when you do not have to. Gillette invented
the safety razor when he stopped to look for an alternative way of shaving. We often assume that things are done in
the best possible way, but that is not always so. Often things are done in that way for historical reasons or
because no one has tried to find a better way.
Whenever you set out to look for alternatives you must be very clear about the purpose of the alternative.
... I want alternative ways of blocking this hole.
... I want alternative ways of carrying water to that point.
... I want alternative suggestions as to how this system might fail.
'I want alternative colors for the carpet' is quite different from 'I want alternative ways of covering the floor'.
If you just say, 'I want alternatives to a carpet,' it is not clear whether you want alternative ways of covering
the floor or alternatives that are as warm as a carpet. As with CAF, the more formally and the more deliberately the
tool is used the more valuable it becomes as a tool.
~ * ~
VALUES
In mathematics and in logic puzzles it is enough to get the right answer. Real life is very different because values
are involved. Values are part of thinking. Values usually involve other people. A logically correct solution to a
problem may be unacceptable because it goes against people's values (which may be illogical).
If we are going to think in the real world, we have to be conscious of values in all our thinking.
In all thinking there are two key questions which should become a thinking habit. These questions should be asked
routinely whenever we are thinking about something:
1. What are the values involved?
2. Who is affected by the values?
Both yellow-hat and black-hat thinking are concerned with values. With yellow-hat thinking we look for the benefits.
With black-hat thinking we look for the problems and dangers.
In looking at values we need to look at the people involved. The specific OPV (Other people’s views) tool is
explained in the next few pages.
In looking at values we need to look at the “Consequences” of any action. The specific C&S tool is explained in the
next few pages.
In looking at values we need a quick way of assessing the “Plus, Minus and Interesting” aspects. The specific PMI
tool is explained in the next few pages.
~ * ~
OPV: Other People’s Views
The world is full of people. Thinking is done by people. Thinking affects people.
The two key questions are:
1. Who is affected by this thinking (action)?
2. What are the views (thinking) of those affected?
The OPV and values are very closely linked because the views of those affected are going to be determined by the
values involved. So in doing an OPV we need to look closely at the values involved.
Two sides in an argument: One obvious use of the OPV is to consider the thinking of both sides in an argument or
conflict. If you are on one side of the conflict, you make an effort to see things from the other side.
This effort to see the other point of view or other perception of the situation must be objective. How do they see
things?
~ * ~
C&S: Consequences and Sequel
Never mind about the 'sequel' part. treat this perception tool as 'consequences'. The tool is pronounced 'C and You
could make a case for saying that this is the most important of all the thinking tools in real life. If your
thinking is going to result in action of any sort (decisions, choices, plans, initiatives etc.) then that action is
going to take place in the future. So you have to look at the consequences of that action.
Will it work out?
What are the benefits?
What are the problems and dangers (risks)?
What are the costs?
TIME SCALE
IMMEDIATE: The immediate consequences of the action.
SHORT-TERM: What happens after the immediate.
MEDIUM-TERM: What happens when things have settled down.
LONG-TERM: What happens much later. The actual timings will vary from situation to situation. For example, with a new
electric power station, immediate is five years, short-term is ten years. medium-term is twenty years and long-term
is up to fifty years. With a quarrel with your friend, immediate is now. short-term is one day, medium-term is one
week, and long-term is one month.
For each situation set the specific time scales before starting to do the C&S.
RISK
Will it work out as I hope it will?
What might go wrong?
What are the actual dangers?
Another way of looking at risk is to ask yourself:
What is the worst thing that can go wrong?
If you can imagine the worst and still face it, you may want to go ahead with your action.
You could also ask:
What is the ideal (best) outcome?
In between these two you might ask:
What is the most likely outcome?
CERTAINTY
You can never be certain about the future. You can never have full information about the future. That is one of the
reasons why thinking is so important. When we look at the future with a C&S there are different levels of certainty
or uncertainty.
I am sure that things will turn out like this.
This is the most likely outcome.
It could be like this, or like this.
This is a possibility - but I cannot be sure.
I have no idea what will happen.
We often do have to act with low levels of certainty. We cannot always wait for full certainty (which may never
become available). The important point is to be aware of the level of certainty. If you really are guessing - then
know that you are guessing.
~ * ~
PMI: Plus, Minus and Interesting
Many highly intelligent people use their thinking to back up or defend their immediate judgement of a matter. The PMI
is a perception-broadening tool (attention-directing) which forces a thinker to explore the situation before coming
to a judgement.
The PMI is an exploring tool and also an evaluation tool. Let us see what we will see if we look in all directions.
At first sight the PMI may look like a mini-version of the six thinking hats. It resembles the yellow hat, black hat
and green hat (interesting). There is a resemblance, but the PMI is directly concerned with good (plus), bad (minus)
and interesting points. The black hat is not concerned with minus points directly but with judgement of how
something fits facts or experience. Also the black and yellow hats do have to be logical, whereas the PMI does not
—and can even include feelings.
The PMI is a very simple, overall, exploration scan.
INTERESTING
... 'Interesting to see what would happen ...'
... 'Interesting to see what this might lead to ...'
... 'What would happen if ...'
You can use phrases like this in order to collect the interesting points. Interesting points are neither good nor bad
but points of interest. Interesting points are observations and comments. Neutral points (neither good nor bad) also
come under interesting.
SCAN
The PMI is a scanning tool. It is not a matter of thinking of the points as they come up and then dropping each point
into a box labelled. P. M or I. It is a matter of specifically looking in the Plus direction first and noting what
you see (ignore any other points); then looking specifically in the Minus direction and noting what you see (ignore
any other points); and finally looking specifically in the Interesting direction.
Always keep the PMI sequence in that order (Plus points first, then Minus, then Interesting).
~ * ~
FOCUS AND PURPOSE
KEY QUESTIONS
All thinking habits have some key questions that we should be asking ourselves all the time. For focus and purpose
these are:
What am I looking at (thinking about) right now?
What am I trying to do?
You can ask yourself such questions from time to time in your thinking. You can raise such questions at a meeting
which seems to be getting nowhere.
SETTING THE FOCUS
Just as we need to be aware of the focus and purpose so we should also be able to set the focus and purpose.
What do you want to focus on?
Both from moment to moment and also in setting a thinking agenda (blue hat) you should be able to pick out and define
different focus areas — and what you want to do with each focus area.
TYPE OF THINKING
We can consider four broad types of thinking:
EXPLORING: Looking around, increasing our knowledge and aware-ness of the subject. We want to make a better map of
it.
SEEKING: Here we have a definite need. We want something. We want to end up with something specific. We may need a
solution for a problem. We may need a design or a new creative idea. We may need to resolve a conflict.
CHOOSING: There are a number of alternatives and we have to make a choice or decision. There might be just one action
course and our choice is whether to use it or not.
ORGANIZING: Here all the pieces are present just as the pieces of a puzzle might all be present. We have to put the
pieces together in the most effective way. We move things around. We try one way or another. We use various thinking
tools (AFC OPV. C&S etc.). Designing a house is part of creative thinking and part of 'seeking' thinking. Putting
the house up is part of organizing thinking. Laying out a plan and carrying out the plan can both be part of
organizing thinking.
CHECKING: Is this correct? Is this right? Does it fit the evidence? Is it safe? Is it acceptable? This is black-hat
thinking or critical thinking. We react to what is put before us. We judge it. We check it.
~ * ~
AGO: Aims, Goals and Objectives
Pronounced: A-G-O
This is another of the CoRT perception-broadening, attention-directing tools.
AGO is related to the thinking habit of wanting to know the focus and purpose of thinking at every moment. AGO,
however, is more concerned with the over-all purpose or objective of the thinking than the moment-to-moment focus.
What is the objective of our thinking?
What do we want to end up with?
As soon as you have a clear view of the ideal outcome of your thinking effort — then you have a clear AGO.
ALTERNATIVE DEFINITIONS OF THE OBJECTIVE
An AGO is often a matter for discussion. Someone may do an AGO and others may not be happy with the definition of the
objective that has been suggested. It is always worth trying alternative definitions. There is no one right way of
defining a problem (until after you have solved it) but some ways are much more helpful than others.
SUB-OBJECTIVES
On the way to a distant town there may be other towns that we pass through on the way. So we may set up
sub-objectives on the way to solving the over-all problem. This is related both to breaking down the big problem
into smaller ones and also to picking out focus areas. Deciding between these definitions is not important. What is
important is to know the objective of the thinking that is taking place.
What is the objective of our thinking?
What is the focus at this moment?
~ * ~
FIP: First Important Priorities
This attention-directing tool is pronounced 'FIPP'.
Many of the attention-directing tools are designed to broaden perception (CAF, CBS, OPV, PMI, APC). This is part of
'parallel' thinking: what else? We try to add to the list just as we try to think of more factors in CAF. With FIP
as with AGO we try to narrow things down.
FIP is concerned directly with priorities. With FIP we direct attention to priorities.
What are the priorities here?
Not everything is of equal importance. Some things are much more important than others. Some values are much more
important than others.
The FIP tool is related to the AGO tool and also to focus and purpose. because just as we need to know our objective
at the beginning so we also need to know our priorities.
The objective is what we are trying to reach. The priorities are the guidelines which tell us how we get there.
Priorities are things that have to be taken into account. These are usually priority values and priority factors.
INCLUDE AND AVOID
Some priorities have to be included. Safety is a priority that has to be included in any thinking on airplanes and
air traffic. Human rights and justice are priorities that have to be included in law and police matters. Ease of
manufacture is usually a priority that has to be included by designers. Cost is a factor that has usually to be
included in setting up any business — so are profits.
Some priorities have to be avoided. We should try to avoid pollution. We should try to avoid sharp edges and
detachable pieces in toys for young children. We should try to avoid fear in medical care. We should make it
difficult to cheat systems (fraud). We try to reduce risk.
Through language we can sometimes convert one type of priority into another: we should seek hygiene in food
retailing; we should avoid food contamination. We should seek efficiency in energy use; we should avoid energy
waste.
HOW MANY PRIORITIES?
When you look at a list of factors (for example in choosing a holiday) you might find that all of the factors seem to
be priorities. Usually a case can be made for the importance and value of most things — if we try hard enough. But
the point of FIP is to force us to make choices: what are the really important things (not what would we like to
have).
So it is useful when doing a FIP exercise to set an artificial limit on the priorities. This limit could be three.
four or five. You cannot go beyond these. You may be able to condense several factors or values into one priority.
In serious matters you need not stick to this artificial limit. but such a limit provides good thinking discipline.
~ * ~
If you want to go through a review of reading done till now by the author, refer to this: “FIRST REVIEW SECTION” in
the book at page 141.
~ * ~
PART THREE
BROAD AND DETAIL
Moving from broad idea to detailed idea and back again is both an important thinking habit and an important thinking
operation.
... 'Get me a drink.'
... 'Get me a soft drink.'
... 'Get me a lemonade.'
We move from the broad to the detailed. In this case there are three levels. The detail level is always the one we
can carry out. If any soft drink would do. that would be the detail level.
... 'I am going to reward him.'
... 'I am going to give him some money as a reward.'
... 'I am going to give him $50 as a reward.'
Again we move from the broad intention to the actual detail of what is to be done. In much of our thinking we do have
to be detailed and specific and sometimes being 'broad' means being unable to give a detailed answer. But there are
other times when it is very useful to be able to work at the 'broad' level.
GENERATING ALTERNATIVES
In a concrete floor there is a hole that is filled with water. You want to get the water out of the hole.
... 'I could suck the water out.'
... 'I could lift the water out.'
... 'I could displace the water.'
Each of these is a broad idea, a general method or a broad concept. Once we have the broad idea we then go on to see
in what ways that broad idea could be carried out as a detailed idea. 'Suck the water out' suggests a pump or a
siphon. 'Lift the water out' suggests a small bucket, spoon, sponge or mop. 'Displace the water' suggests putting in
stones or even a plastic bag filled with water and then removing these objects later.
Instead of immediately trying to find the detailed idea it is often more useful to define some broad ideas. Once you
have the broad idea, you look around for actual ways of carrying it out in a detailed way.
EXTRACTING THE BROAD IDEA
If we are seeking to improve or change something, the way we do it is to extract the broad idea. Once we have the
broad idea we can do two things. We can see if a different broad idea may serve the purpose (what we want to
achieve). Or. we can see if the broad idea can be carried out in a different and better way.
What are we trying to do?
What is the broad idea here?
Is there a better broad idea?
How else can we carry out the broad idea?
CONCEPT AND FUNCTION
We often use a lot of different words to describe the 'broad idea'.
broad idea
general method
principle
broad concept
concept
function
In some cases, it is more appropriate to use one word rather than another.
... 'What is the function of this switch?'
... 'The concept in this course is teach-yourself.'
... 'The principle is that of paying people by what they actually produce, not by time.'
... 'The general method we use here is to separate casualties into three groups: those who can wait; those who cannot
be saved; those who need urgent attention.'
BASIC THINKING OPERATIONS
We will look at the three basic operations that a carpenter performs as an analogy to the thinking operations.
The cutting operation, The sticking operation and The shaping operation.
THE CUTTING OPERATION
You cut a piece of wood, you cut a piece of cake, you cut a slice of watermelon. ‘Cutting’ means that you do not want
the whole thing. You want to remove part of the whole.
When we direct attention to part of the world around us we are ‘cutting’ a piece out of the whole. So all attention
directing is a form of cutting.
FOCUS: We direct attention to part of the whole. We may eventually pay attention to the whole but do it bit by bit.
EXTRACT A FEATURE: From the whole situation we pull out or extract a feature. This is much used operation in thinking
and is the basis of other operations.
ANALYSIS: When we extract a feature we can leave the rest behind. With analysis, however, we seek to be
comprehensive. There should no left-overs. We seek to break down the situation into parts or pieces. These parts and
their relationship describe the whole situation.
EXPANSION: Suppose there is a drawing of a square. You could pay attention to the whole square. Or, you could pay
attention to just a corner of the square. When we pay attention to the whole square we are really cutting that
square out of its surroundings. Expansion means taking a bigger cut which includes not only the square but more of
its surroundings. Though ‘expansion’ seems to be the opposite of ‘cutting’ this is not really the case. The mind is
just taking a bigger view of the surroundings.
So expansion and exploration are actually part of the ‘cutting’ process of thinking. Think of a wide-angle lens on a
camera. This takes a bigger picture.
THE STICKING OPERATION
The sticking operation is where things are put together and they do not just fall apart. If you put two random things
together for no reason at all and no connection develops between them, they remain 'unstuck'. Placing two pieces of
wood together is not sticking the pieces together. For that there must be some sort of attachment or glue.
CONNECTIONS: The mind is very good at making connections. These may just be associations. Things have occurred
together in space or time, so there is an association. Sometimes the link is stronger and there is a functional
connection. If we place things together in a group or category, there is a linking factor (or factors) which all
members of the group possess.
RECOGNITION: This is a fundamental thinking operation that arises directly from connection. What is before our eyes
(or ears etc.) connects up with a pattern we already have stored in our mind. So we recognize the object and know
what to do with it.
Pattern recognition and extrapolation into the future are based on a combination of recognition and checking.
SYNTHESIS: This is where we deliberately put things together to produce an effect. Writing any sentence is an example
of synthesis. Combination of any sort is a form of synthesis (which was originally supposed to be a combination of
thesis and anti-thesis).
CONSTRUCTION: This could be regarded as being the same as synthesis but I prefer 'construction' as this has a broader
meaning. Synthesis suggests putting together what is now present. Construction may imply building things up step by
step.
DESIGN: This is a form of construction. Things are put together in a certain way to achieve a defined objective. in
design there are elements of creativity and, sometimes, aesthetics.
In general, the 'sticking operation' consists of two things:
1. Recognizing connections that are there.
2. Putting things together for a purpose.
THE SHAPING OPERATION
The carpenter has a shape in mind. The carpenter may even have that shape drawn up on a piece of cardboard (a
template). As the carpenter shapes with the plane he or she continually checks the emerging shape against the
planned shape.
It is this constant checking between the desired shape and the actual shape that is the basis of the thinking
operation of shaping.
In fact, the operation could be called 'checking'.
JUDGEMENT: Is this correct? Does this fit what I know? Does this fit the facts? These are all aspects of black-hat
checking. There is something against which we are checking or judging what is placed before us.
In real life, ‘assessing’ is often a complex form of both exploration and judgement. We explore the effects of a
planned action both now and into the future. We then just those effects against norms.
MATCHING: Here we set out with specific needs and then check to see whether what we find matches those needs.
Whenever you ask a question you are setting up a need for information. When you are given an answer you check
whether the answer matches your needs.
HYPOTHESIS: Usually we check what we find against something that we already know (laws, facts etc.). With a
hypothesis we imagine a possible mechanism (or explanation) and then see how well evidence supports that hypothesis.
In speculation (what if...?) we do the same. We throw up tentative and even provocative ideas and then seek to check
them out. Scientific thinking includes the ability both to set up such hypotheses and also to check them out.
COMPARISON: Often in judgement or checking we compare something in front of us with something we have in mind. With
comparison we may have two (or more) things in front of us and we set about comparing them. In essence this means
looking for points of similarity and points of difference.
~ * ~
TRUTH, LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING
In practical terms there are two sorts of truth. There is 'game truth' and 'reality truth'.
GAME TRUTH: If you set up a game with rules and definitions, matters which agree with those rules and definitions are
true and matters which do not agree are false.
REALITY TRUTH: How true are our ideas and information to the actual real world? We rely on perceptions and imperfect
knowledge. From time to time even scientists are convinced they are right — but find out they have been mistaken.
Reality truth is very important for most practical thinking. Even with mathematics there is a stage in which our
perceptions of the real world have to be translated into symbols.
We live in a practical world and we do have to get on with things. We have to make decisions and plan action. We
cannot always wait for absolute truth. So there are different levels of practical 'reality truth' that we use.
1. Checkable truth. You can check something again and again and always come up with the same answer. Other people can
check it and will also get the same answer. It is quite possible that everyone's methods of checking (or
instruments) are intrinsically faulty.
2. Personal experience. We tend to believe the evidence of our own eyes. But we can be mistaken. Memory may play
tricks on us. There is illusion, deception and even hallucination.
3. Second-hand experience. That what other people tell us. Even if an-other person is sincere and reliable, that
person may have got the information from someone who is not so reliable. In any case people may be reliable and
sincere and yet mistaken.
4. Generally accepted. It is part of the culture or accepted know-ledge. The earth goes around the sun. Deficiency of
vitamin C will cause scurvy. We only need to look back in history to see that over and again generally accepted
ideas turn out to be false.
5. Authority. The authority of parents, teachers, reference books, scientists, religious leaders can provide a higher
check on truth than is available to most people — so we tend to accept these matters. Again, history has shown us
that authority can be mistaken.
THINKING HABIT
As part of our thinking habits we should always be asking the question:
What is the truth value here?
You then determine the truth value level, as in the examples about the cow. You need not accept everything you are
told. You can try to check things (especially information) for yourself.
Perhaps the most important difficulty in thinking, particularly where other people are involved, is the 'claimed'
truth value.
... 'This is so.'
... 'This is absolutely true.'
... 'This is always true.'
If that is the claim made for the truth value, then you need to check the value very closely. On the other hand, if
the claim is more modest, you might accept it.
... This is sometimes the case.'
... 'I remember reading that.'
... 'This could be true.'
... 'Someone once told me.'
There is always the balance between the claimed truth value and the actual truth value.
Unfortunately, in thinking and argument, people tend to be dogmatic and certain in order to make their point. Also,
our normal everyday habits of logic often make us insist on words like 'all'. 'always', 'never' because without
these absolutes the logic would not work. If we were just to say 'by and large', 'in general', 'on the whole', 'in
my experience', we would be closer to the truth but unable to use the power of inclusion/exclusion logic.
LOGIC
With logic we move from the present position to a new. one. No new outside information is coming in. We work forward
from what we have (deductive logic).
Our first examination of truth value was whether something corresponded with reality.
Our second examination of truth value is whether something follows from what we have (according to the line of
argument).
The habit questions to be asked are:
Does this follow?
Even more important is the question: "Must this follow (as claimed)?"
A logical argument depends on something that must follow. If we are content ‘it can follow’ then that is a suggestion
and an exploration (and useful as such).
~ * ~
LOGIC, INFORMATION AND CREATIVITY
We very often forget that the 'must follow' of a logical argument is actually based not on logic but on a lack of
creativity or information.
A man enters a room in which there is a beautiful crystal vase. The room is sealed. No one can enter the room. There
are no windows or apertures into the room. Ten minutes later the man comes out. The vase is found broken in the
room. He denies breaking the vase. But surely he must have broken the vase — there is no other possible explanation.
We need creativity or information to think of the possibility of a high-pitched tone shattering the glass. Once we
have such thoughts, we can no longer say he 'must' have done it. That is what a good criminal lawyer is all about.
Creativity suggests alternative outcomes.
By definition contradictory things cannot both exist. The difficulty is to decide whether two things really are
contradictory. We have love—hate relationships and in Japan it is perfectly possible for someone to be friend and
not-friend because the Japanese do not have the Western horror of contradictions.
The original purpose of critical thinking was to uncover the truth by attacking and removing all that was false - so
the truth would be revealed. This has a considerable value in discouraging the sloppy use of language, concepts and
false arguments, but it lacks generative and constructive power.
To be sure the removal of weaknesses - as in black-hat thinking - will strengthen an idea, but that is not enough for
constructive thinking.
Critical thinking does have a value as does one wheel on a motor-car. But the teaching only of critical thinking is
quite insufficient.
Reactive thinking by itself is insufficient.
Water puts out fires.
Water is a liquid.
Gasoline is a liquid.
So gasoline should put out fires.
Critical thinking would point this out as a classic error of reasoning. John loves eating oysters. John is a boy.
Peter is also a boy - so Peter must love eating oysters. We can easily see that this does not follow.
The reasoning might have gone differently.
All the liquids I have ever come across (water, mud, milk, urine) put out fire.
This may be due to their liquid nature which prevents air getting to the fire.
Gasoline is a new liquid (which I have not come across before) so it is reasonable to suppose it might put out a
fire.
This line of inductive reasoning seems quite valid. It is only my experience with gasoline or knowledge about
gasoline which tells me otherwise.
~ * ~
UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES?
'There is something wrong with this thermometer. The reading won't go higher than 96 degrees but the water seems to
be boiling. Shouldn't it read 100 degrees?'
Everyone knows that water boils at 100 degrees centigrade (212 degrees Fahrenheit). Right? Wrong. Water boils at
100°C only at sea-level. If the air pressure decreases as you go up a mountain, water boils at a lower temperature.
So the scientific truth that water boils at 100°C holds only under special circumstances.
Salt is good. Salt makes food taste better. The human body needs salt. But too much salt on food tastes bad.
In all these examples something which seems to be obvious and true turns out to be true only under certain
circumstances.
Whenever we claim a truth we need to specify the circumstances under which the truth holds.
Often both parties to the disagreement are right - but under different circumstances.
Does this mean that all truth is relative? Not at all. It means that some truth is relative. It is just that we have
to be careful with those words 'all' and 'always' which are the foundation of our usual logic. We could say 'by and
large' instead of 'always' but if we do want to say 'always' we need to define the circumstances. There are some
exceptions to most generalizations.
THINKING HABIT - We need to get into the thinking habit of asking an important question:
Under what circumstances is this true (does it apply)?
~ * ~
HYPOTHESIS, SPECULATION AND PROVOCATION
Hypothesis, speculation and provocation are very important thinking skills for progress, change, science and creative
thinking of any sort. Unfortunately, most traditional approaches to thinking ignore these important matters.
Hypothesis, speculation and provocation allow us to play in our minds. We try out new things. We carry out the
'thought experiments' that Einstein used to generate his powerful ideas.
JUMP AHEAD
In push thinking, we say:
“This is so – and as a result that follows.”
In pull thinking we say:
“This could be so and if we make this jump then that might follow.”
LEVEL OF SPECULATION
The levels of certainty range from the full certainty of good logic to the deliberate provocation of lateral
thinking.
CERTAIN: The result of good logical deduction.
REASONABLY SURE: Not yet absolutely certain but very likely indeed. Just needs final confirmation. Also anything to
do with the -future where absolute certainty is difficult.
GOOD GUESS: We know it is a guess but it is a good guess and certainly the best available guess.
POSSIBLE: This is no more than a possibility. There is not much supportive evidence but it is a possibility.
Sometimes it is no more than 'just possible'.
TENTATIVE: This is 'flying a kite'. This is putting forward an idea that is not thought to be very reasonable to see
what effect it has.
PROVOCATION: Here there is no claim at all for reasonableness or probability. A provocation is designed to get us out
of our usual thinking. The provocation can be signaled with the word 'po', which indicates that it is indeed a
provocation. 'Po cars should have square wheels.'
---
CREATIVE ATTITUDE
In argument and in much of thinking we want to confirm what we already know. With a creative attitude we want to move
forward to something new.
Speculation allows us to open up new possibilities and then to pursue these possibilities.
Speculation allows us to set up new frames so that we can look at the evidence in a new way.
Speculation and provocation allow us to develop deliberate creative thinking tools to get us out of the traditional
thinking patterns.
Without speculation we can get the steady development and improvement of an idea, but we are not likely to get a
really new idea.
The creative attitude involves risk and play and trying things out.
BUSINESS THINKING
New initiatives, new ventures, new enterprises are all examples of speculative thinking. The idea is put together and
then we seek to check it out through collecting information and doing market re-search. There may still be an
element of risk — even though the entrepreneur is convinced that he or she is logically correct.
In launching new products or new strategies there is always speculative thinking: 'What if we do this ...?' The
response of competitors has to be guessed at.
Because business is always dealing with action and with the future there is always speculation. Should we then not
try to reduce the amount of speculation rather than to increase it? We need to do both at the same time. We need to
reduce speculation and risk by collecting information, using monitoring and having back-up strategies. At the same
time, we need to increase the speculation in terms of new ventures and new directions and new methods.
~ * ~
LATERAL THINKING
There are different levels of definition. 'You cannot dig a hole in a different place by digging the same hole
deeper.'
Trying harder with the same ideas and the same approach may not solve the problem. You may need to move 'laterally'
to try new ideas and a new approach.
'Lateral thinking is for escaping from established ideas and perceptions in order to find new ones.'
Our existing ideas have been established by particular sequences of experience. We tend to defend the established
ideas and to see the world through the established perceptions. Lateral thinking is a means of escaping from the
existing ideas and perceptions in order to find better ones.
'A self-organizing information system allows incoming information to organize itself into patterns. These patterns
are not symmetric. We need a means for cutting across patterns (moving laterally). Lateral thinking provides that
means.'
Obviously this is a technical definition and will not mean much to those who do not understand what is meant by a
self-organizing system. This is the technical definition of lateral thinking and indicates that it is more than just
a descriptive term. Lateral thinking is based on information behavior in self-organizing systems.
The specific meaning of 'lateral thinking' covers the use of specific techniques which are used to help us generate
new ideas and new perceptions. This is directly concerned with creative thinking.
The general meaning of 'lateral thinking' covers thinking that sets out to explore and to develop new perceptions
instead of just working harder with the existing perceptions. In this sense lateral thinking is closely connected
with perceptual thinking. Many of the attention directing tools (CAF, OPV. C&S) are part of this general exploration
of lateral thinking.
~ * ~
PROVOCATION AND PO
We come now to the specific techniques of lateral thinking. These techniques can be used deliberately by a thinker
who needs to generate a new idea.
... 'Po cows can fly.'
... 'Po cars have square wheels.'
Both the above statements are totally unreasonable. They are contrary to experience and to the truth. Why should we
make such absurd statements?
Provocation goes beyond hypothesis and speculation. In hypothesis and speculation, we guess that something might be
so but we cannot yet prove it. With provocation, there is no pretense whatever that something might be true.
Because a provocation is not intended to be true we need some way of signaling to our listeners that a statement is
put forward as a provocation — otherwise the listeners might think we have gone mad. We need a specific signal word
for a provocation. Ordinary language does not contain such a word. The word 'suppose' and the phrase 'what if ...'
are too weak, since they can be used to signal guesses that might be true. So several years ago I invented a new
word, 'po'.
The word 'po' means: 'What follows is put forward directly as a provocation.' The letters 'p' and 'o' can be taken to
represent “Provocative Operation”. Although it seems crazy and directly contrary to normal logic, a provocation is
actually a logical operation in a patterning system.
SETTING UP PROVOCATIONS
Where do provocations come from? How do you set up your own provocations?
RECEIVED PROVOCATIONS: You hear or read a stupid remark. This remark is not intended as a provocation. It may be
intended as a serious idea or as a silly idea (for a laugh). You have a choice. You can dismiss the idea or you can
choose to treat the idea as a provocation. Radar was invented this way. Some mad person suggested that a radio beam
could be used to shoot down airplanes. From this crazy idea (because the power of such a beam was very low) came the
useful idea of using the radio beam to 'detect' airplanes.
So you can choose to treat any received idea as a provocation.
REVERSAL: You look at the way things are normally done and then you deliberately go in the opposite direction. We
normally try to make wheels as round as possible — so let us make them 'un-round' or square. You normally pay to buy
goods -- so let us have the store 'paying' the purchaser. This might have led to ideas like trading stamps. What is
the normal direction? What is the reverse (opposite) direction?
ESCAPE: In this method you look at some feature that we normally take for granted in the situation (it should never
be a negative feature) and then we drop that feature or cancel it. For example, we take for granted that watch dogs
should bark. We drop that feature — escape from it — and so we get: 'Po watch dogs do not bark'. This leads on to
the idea of small highly intelligent watch dogs that do not bark. Instead they quietly slink off into a corner where
there is a button they have been trained to press. This button sets off a sophisticated alarm and security system —
it could also trigger a tape-recorder playing a recording of many dogs barking.
WISHFUL THINKING: This should not just be a mild desire, like reducing the cost of an object by 10 per cent, but it
should be a fantasy. You can say: 'Wouldn't it be nice if ...' Wouldn't it be nice if polluting factories were
downstream of themselves on the river? This leads to the practical idea of legislating that inputs from the river
must always be downstream of the output — so the factory is the first to sample its own pollution.
OUTRAGEOUS: Quite simply this covers anything at all which you want to set up as a provocation. Po cars are made of
spaghetti. Po breakfast cereals should grow in their packets. Po everyone votes every day on government decisions.
This last provocation could lead to the idea that each day at 10 pm every householder would switch on an electric
fire if that householder disagreed with an announced policy. The surge in electricity usage could instantly be
measured at the power station — so giving an instant total vote. For a vote of agreement, you switch on the fire at
another time.
In general people are much too timid about setting up provocations. You are protected by the word 'po'. A provocation
is meant to be a provocation. Whether you can use the provocation is not important. If you are setting up good
provocations, at first you might only be able to use half of them. As you become more skilled at 'movement' you will
be able to use more of them. A weak or timid provocation is very little use.
You should say: 'Here is my provocation.' Then you try to make use of it. It is a two-stage operation. Do not think
of how you might use the provocation as you are setting it up.
~ * ~
MOVEMENT
A provocation is useless if we cannot do anything with it. We use 'movement' to move from the provocation to a new
idea. Provocation and movement go together as a combined process.
The most important thing to keep in mind is that 'movement' is different from judgment. Many traditional approaches
to creative thinking talk about 'delaying judgement' or 'suspending judgement' but this is much too weak. Just
refusing to 'judge' does not indicate what the thinker should do instead. 'Movement' is an active operation that we
can use deliberately. As we practice the operation of 'movement' we become more skilled at this operation.
Eventually we can become so skilled that we are able to get 'movement' from almost any provocation.
With judgement (black-hat thinking) we compare what is before us with what we know. If what is before us is wrong. we
reject it. With 'movement' we are operating outside the judgement/truth system. With movement we look at what is
before us (usually a provocation) and we see how we can 'move' forward from this to a useful new idea.
WAYS OF GETTING MOVEMENT
There are a number of ways of moving forward from a provocation. Some of these ways are given here. These ways can be
practiced until skill in the operation of movement has been built up. Without such skill lateral thinking is not
effective. It is not too difficult to set up provocations — the skill lies in getting movement from these
provocations.
ATTITUDE: There is the general attitude of 'movement'. We make a general effort to go forward from the provocation.
What does this lead to? What does this suggest? Where does this take me? What is of interest here?
MOMENT-TO-MOMENT: This may be the most powerful way of getting movement. We visualize the provocation in action — no
matter how absurd this seems. So we visualize cows flying. We visualize a car bumping along on square wheels. We
visualize a plane landing upside down. As we visualize these things we watch for what happens moment-to-moment. This
is totally different from seeing what happens 'in the end'. In the end the car with square wheels would shake to
pieces. In the end the plane landing upside down would crash. it is this moment-to-moment observation of the
provocation in action that can lead to new ideas.
EXTRACT A PRINCIPLE: Could we pick out or extract some principle from this provocation and then make use of this
principle in a practical idea? In looking for a new advertising medium we might say: 'Po we should bring back the
town crier.' in the operation of the town crier we find an interesting principle: you cannot 'switch off' the town
crier. We take this principle and look around for a medium we would be unable to switch off. We think of advertising
tele-phones. If you did not want to pay for a call you press a special button and get a free call — but at intervals
advertising messages come on the line and interrupt your conversation. In addition to extracting a principle we can
also extract a key feature or a specific aspect of the provocation. This becomes a sort of 'seed' that we take to
plant in order to grow a new idea.
FOCUS ON THE DIFFERENCE: How is this different from what we normally do? What are the points of difference? By
focusing on these points of difference we seek to move on to a new idea. The difference between a plane landing
upside down and the right way up is that in the upside-down position the wings would give down-ward thrust. This
leads on to the idea of 'positive' landings. From this we can actually get to some useful ideas — such as cancelling
a negative bias to get instant extra lift in an emergency.
Focusing on the difference is extremely important when a thinker is faced with that most powerful killer of new
ideas, the phrase: 'This is the same as ...' You suggest a new idea and this is dismissed by someone using that
phrase. The phrase is so powerful because it does not attack the idea but simply indicates that it is not worthy of
any attention since it is already known or being used. The only way to counter this phrase is to say: 'It may seem
the same as (something) but let us focus on the difference ...' You then proceed to list the points of difference.
SEARCH FOR VALUE: Is there any value at all in this provocation? Are there any directly positive aspects? Are there
any special circumstances under which the provocation would have a direct value? The provocation 'Po ambitious
employees should wear a yellow shirt or blouse' leads to several interesting ideas. For example, in a service
business a customer would always try to choose a service assistant wearing a yellow shirt or blouse.
The more our minds become sensitive to value, the abler we become to sense value in almost everything — including
provocations.
Once we have detected the value, we strengthen it, build upon it and try to make it practical. A dog detects a faint
scent. The dog pursues that scent. The scent gets stronger. Finally, the dog has tracked down its quarry. In the
same way we can 'scent' value and can pursue that scent until we find value strong enough to be the basis of a new
idea.
INTERESTING: What is 'interesting' about this provocation? The term ‘interesting' covers many of the other ways of
getting movement. There may be an interesting point of difference. There may be an interesting principle.
'Interesting' forms the third part of the PMI attention-directing tool that was described earlier in this book. A
creative person notices and seeks out what is interesting. You may have to make the effort to find out something
interesting.
~ * ~
THE RANDOM WORD
The 'random-word' method is a powerful lateral-thinking technique that is very easy to use. It is by far the simplest
of all creative techniques and is now widely used by people who need to create new ideas (for example, for new
products). I first described this technique many years ago.
The history of inventions and ideas has many instances where a valuable creative idea seems to have been triggered by
a chance happening (like the apple that is supposed to have fallen on to the head of Newton and inspired his concept
of gravity as a force).
It is said that Archimedes, playing around with the soap. (or some other object) in his bath, suddenly hit on the
idea of how to test whether a crown was made of real gold or not (by the difference between the weight of the crown
in water and out of water). Do we have to sit around and wait for chance events to spark a new idea? Do we have to
sit under trees and wait for an apple to fall on our heads? We can do that. But we can also get up and shake the
tree. We can produce our own chance events. That is exactly what we do in the random-word lateral-thinking
technique.
GETTING THE RANDOM WORD
We cannot choose the stimulus word because, if we chose the word, that word would merely fit in with our existing
ideas (that would be the basis for the 'choice'). So instead of choosing the word we get a word by chance. That is
why it is called a 'random word'.
You could have a bag full of thousands of words written on slips of paper. You put your hand into the bag and pull
out one word.
You could think of a number of a page in a dictionary: say page 87. Then you think of the position of a word on that
page: say the sixth word from the top. You open the dictionary at that page and count down to the sixth word. Here
is your random word. If it is not a noun, keep going down until you come to the first noun.
You can close your eyes and circle your index finger above an open newspaper. You bring your finger down on to the
newspaper and take the noun nearest to your finger.
You can have a list of sixty words (like the list given opposite). You glance at the seconds reading on your watch.
If the reading shows 27 seconds you just take the 27th word from your list. If your watch can deal with 1/100ths of
a second, your list can have 100 words and then you stop the reading (on a stop watch) and use that number to get a
word.
It is much easier to use nouns than verbs, adjectives or adverbs. If you construct a list of your own, they should be
well-known words with many associations, functions or features. Always try to use the first word you get. If you do
not like the first word and try for another, and another, you are just waiting for a word to connect with ideas you
already have. This is no use at all. So if the first word you get does not work move on to another technique and
only try the random word again later.
USE OF THE TECHNIQUE
We want some new ideas about copiers.
The seconds reading on the watch shows '19' so the word is 'nose' (from the list given here).
We say: 'Copier po nose.'
Nose suggests smell.
What value could smell have (movement)?
Perhaps a copier could give off different smells depending on what was wrong with it. So we could use smell as a
fault indicator. If your copier is not working you just sniff. The smell will immediately tell you what is wrong.
You are asked to entertain some people and have to find something for them to do. The watch reading is 49 seconds, so
the word is 'heart'.
You might think of the little red 'heart' symbol that is now often used to mean: 'I "heart" New York' (I love New
York). So you set the group the task of suggesting other symbols that might suggest various things such as: I 'hate'
New York; I 'don't know anything about' New York; I 'laugh at' New York; I 'am saddened' by New York.
So the technique is very simple to use.
We follow the associations and the functions of the stimulus word.
We use the various methods of movement. We use aspects of the word as a metaphor.
Do not take too many steps in making the connection because if you take too many steps you will simply get back to
ideas you already have and will not be using the special stimulating value of that random word.
Do not start out by putting down a list of aspects of the word because you will then just go down the list to find
the aspect which fits ideas you already have. instead, think of some one aspect of the random word and try hard to
work with that aspect. Only after a good try should you go on to another aspect.
~ * ~
PRINCIPLES OF THINKING
1. Always be constructive.
2. Think slowly and try to make things as simple as possible.
3. Detach your ego from your thinking and be able to stand back to look at your thinking.
4. At this moment, what am I trying to do? What is the focus and purpose of my thinking?
5. Be able to ‘swipe gears’ in your thinking. Know when to use logic when to use creativity, when to seek
information.
6. What is the outcome of my thinking – why do I believe that it will work?
7. Feelings and emotions are important parts of thinking but their place is after exploration and not before.
8. Always try to look for alternatives, for new perceptions and for new ideas.
9. Be able to move back and forth between broad-level thinking and detail-level thinking.
10. Is this a matter of ‘may be’ or a matter of ‘must be’? Logic is only as good as the perception and information on
which it is based.
11. Differing views may all be soundly based on differing perceptions.
12. All actions have consequences and an impact on values, people and the world around.
~ * ~
PART 4
THINKING STRUCTURE – TO/LOPOSO/GO
This is a very simple five-stage general-purpose thinking structure. This structure or framework can be applied to
most thinking situations.
Each of the five steps in the structure is represented by a syllable. All five syllables have a consonant followed by
'0'. This is so the structure is easy to remember.
TO:
Where are we going 'TO'?
'TO'wards what are we going?
What is the objective?
What is the destination?
What do we want to end up with?
What is the focus?
Problem definition and alternative problem definitions.
Use of the tool AGO to define objectives.
Use of the blue hat to define where we want to go.
The syllable 'TO' indicates the objective of our stage we need to define very clearly what we are not enough to have
only a vague and general idea the thinking. This must be precisely spelled out. This first step in the process
should not be rushed. We should try with a clear statement.
LO:
The word 'LO' comes from the old English word 'to look'. We sometimes might say lo and behold'. Some hymns use the
expression. it means 'look at this'.
What have we here?
What is the scene?
What information do we have?
What information do we not have?
White-hat thinking.
Use of CAF. What are the factors to be considered?
Use of OPV. Who are the people involved here?
What is the context of the thinking? It may be friendly, antagonistic, legal, emergency etc.
What are the attitudes involved?
Who is doing the thinking?
What is the terrain?
The 'LO' stage is the stage of looking around. What is available? What are the pieces of the puzzle? This is
exp'LO'ratory thinking. This is parallel thinking. We are scanning to see what we can see. We are not trying to
reach conclusions. At the end of this stage we want to have collected all the information we need — or specified
what we would like to have. We want a good map of the scene. We want a list of factors that have to be considered.
We want to know the context of the thinking. We want to know who is involved. Think of an explorer who is given the
task of mapping out a new country.
PO:
This is the 'PO' syllable that I invented to signal provocation in lateral thinking. Here the use is similar but
broader. Here under 'PO' we put forward possible ideas as well as provocations.
What are the alternatives?
Use of the APC tool to generate alternatives.
Putting down some 'broad-idea' alternatives and then going on to work out the detailed way of carrying out these
broad ideas.
Suggestions.
Proposals.
Possibilities.
Hypotheses.
Speculations.
Constructive ideas.
Green-hat thinking. What comes up under 'PO' will depend somewhat on the nature of the thinking needs. If action is
called for there will be action alternatives. If a problem has to be solved there will be solution alternatives. If
an explanation is needed there will be alternative hypotheses. This 'PO' stage is the stage of green-hat thinking,
which means it is the generative stage. We put forward ideas and suggestions.
At this point we do not decide between the alternatives put forward. We just present them all in parallel.
'At this point we have four possible explanations of why the plane crashed.'
'At this point we have these three alternative solutions to the problem of future water supplies.'
'At this point we have four alternative suggestions as to where we can hold the party.'
'At this point I have two alternative things that I would like for my birthday.'
All the alternatives should be put forward. There should be no pre-selection at this stage. but you may group the
alternatives to indicate the most feasible.
SO:
This is the ordinary language word 'SO' which is used in one of its meanings.
'SO' what does this amount to?
'SO' what do we have here?
'SO' what do we do next?
This is the stage of choice between the possible alternatives.
We compare and examine the alternatives.
We need to come down to one choice of action (or explanation).
We do a FIP to assess the priorities.
We check the alternatives against the priorities and against the objectives of the thinking.
We assess each alternative using PMI. C&S and OPV.
What would happen if we used this alternative (C&S)?
What are the benefits and values (yellow-hat thinking)?
Does this fit what we know (black-hat thinking)?
What are the dangers and problems (black-hat thinking)?
We also seek to modify or improve ideas after black-hat thinking has pointed out the weaknesses.
The input to the 'SO' stage is a number of alternatives.
The output from this stage is a choice, decision or conclusion.
In cases where a single conclusion, decision or choice is not possible, the outcome has to be defined very carefully.
What is the sticking point? Where have we got to? A new thinking task may be defined and the whole thinking process
repeated on this newly defined task.
At the end of the 'SO' stage there must always be a clearly defined outcome.
'The conclusion is that we should stand firm and not give in to the demands.'
'I have finally decided that I want a camera for my birthday.'
'The decision is that we hold the party in John's barn.'
'The choice is that we offer the job to Mr. Jones.'
'The outcome is that we cannot make a decision. This is because we do not have the costs of the alternative plans. We
must now proceed to get those costs.' 'The outcome is that none of the suggested sites is suitable. We must now try
to find some new sites.'
'The outcome is still disagreement. We have a clearer understanding of the positions on each side but no agreement.
The sticking point is payment for weekend work'
Anyone who is not happy with the definition of the outcome at the end of the 'SO' stage is entitled to put on a blue
hat and to say that he or she is not satisfied and that a further attempt should be made to define the outcome.
In cases where action is needed (as with a doctor) it may not be possible to wait until there is more information.
The best possible decision under the circumstances is the one that is used.
GO:
This is the normal use of the word 'GO' and it implies action.
Let's 'GO'.
'GO' forward into action.
Where do we 'GO' from here?
If there is no decision, choice or conclusion at the end of the 'SO' stage, then the 'GO' stage defines the action
steps that must now be taken. This may involve collecting more information. Having a further thinking session.
Setting a deadline.
What is the plan of action?
How do we implement this?
What practical steps do we take?
How do we put this into effect?
How do we monitor progress?
What is the fallback position?
The output of the 'GO' stage is always action. There must always be a definite output from this 'GO' stage. Imagine
you are walking. You take the next step. There must be a direction in which you take the next step. The output of
the 'GO' stage is action for a purpose. 'Doing nothing' is only acceptable if this is actually a positive action.
For example, not lowering prices because a competitor lowers prices. Or, not giving in to ransom demands. 'Doing
nothing' as a result of indecision is not acceptable.
'Here is the action plan.'
~ * ~
ARGUMENTS AND DISAGREEMENTS
This is a very common thinking situation. Or, rather, it is a very common situation that needs more thinking than it
usually gets. People have different views or opinions. People want to do different things. One person feels that
another person should do a particular thing and the other person disagrees.
The range extends from quiet intellectual arguments to fierce emotional disagreements and disputes.
For checking your “EMOTIONS ANS FEELINGS”: Use the RED hat frequently.
PERCEPTIONS:
Perception, and not logic, is the basis of most disagreements and disputes. Each of the parties is being perfectly
logical on the basis of his or her perceptions.
The three basic steps in the settlement of disagreements can also be applied to perceptions:
1. These are my perceptions. This is how I see the situation.
2. This is how I think you see the situation.
3. How do you see the situation?
SIMILARLY, FOR VALUES:
1. These are my values (relevant to the situation).
2. This is how I see your values.
3. What are your values?
SIMILARLY, FOR LOGIC:
1. This is the logic of my argument.
2. I believe this is the logic of your argument.
3. Tell me, once again, what is the logic of your argument.
EMOTIONS
In the end all decisions and choices are emotional. On the whole we do not feel this is a very good way to make
decisions or choices, so we sometimes try to apply some thinking.
The purpose of thinking is to so arrange matters that when we do finally make the 'emotional choice' it is on a much
better basis.
Most choices and decisions are based on three emotions: greed, fear and laziness.
GREED: More money, achievement, being ahead, being noticed, acquiring more skill, getting new friends, being better
at your hobby, better self-image etc. I am not using 'greed' in a bad sense but in the sense of achievement and of
wanting more.
FEAR: Fear of making a mistake, fear of being silly, feat of upsetting others, fear of the unknown, fear of losing
money, insecurity of any sort, fear of change. Fear may prevent us making one type of decision and fear may force us
to make another type of decision.
LAZINESS: In a sense this is the opposite of greed but it also has elements of fear. Not being motivated, not wanting
to make an effort, being content, not wanting the bother and hassle of doing something, not wanting to be caught up
in complicated matters, not wanting problems, wanting an easy life.
When you have made a decision it is a useful simple check to say to yourself: 'What contribution have greed, fear and
laziness made to this decision?'
