

Thinking about Thinking (2007) - achompas
http://the-programmers-stone.com/the-original-talks/day-1-thinking-about-thinking/

======
makmanalp
I really found the Jungian backlash thing very interesting.

I, for example, like to come into work late. I love being lazy in the
mornings, either reading in bed or maybe doing a workout. I do it often. I
think it makes me happy, and I come into work feeling /good/. I also leave
later than most people, often work overtime, and sometimes I'll work on the
weekends, all on my own accord and without getting paid extra.

Now, in many places, I could just /see/ the discomfort this causes in people,
especially those who feel like they're obligated to show up at 8, and leave at
5. Lip service is paid to the usual "as long as you get your work done", but
more than a few times I've been pulled aside to be asked "could you please
come in earlier" \- or I can sense tension when I walk in and some coworkers
have been in for an hour already.

It's all really frustrating. Doubly so when people can't explain why a novel
behavior is bad, but think it's bad anyway. We really are creatures of habit.

~~~
fit2rule
>We really are creatures of habit.

We're also creatures of cooperation. Nothing big happens in the world unless 3
or more people agree to do it - simply, nothing. All groups require a degree
of cooperation/coordination, and fundamental agreement in order to function -
otherwise you just have a fight on your hands, or a disorganized mess, or some
sort of dilettante activity where nothing ever gets done.

So we've evolved, socially, to agree to do things in order to get things done.
Sharing the same schedule and having a common basis of work is fundamental to
human activities; while you may enjoy the luxury of coming late to the office,
others may enjoy the luxury of leaving early from the office to get home when
there are still daylight hours.

Alas, being different than the others means you're imposing a difficulty on
them that they may not feel they deserve, or in any way think is a viable way
of operating. This tension and frustration you're feeling - it goes both ways.
Having a shared, agreed-upon schedule, reduces that tension - whether you like
it or not.

Not saying that you _should_ change just because others need/want you to, but
in fact the disagreement over how best to operate is a cause of unnecessary
tension. If you can't get it together, in spite of whether you're getting the
work done or not, as your manager I'd be inclined to wonder why you think you
have the right to impose such tension on your workplace. Maybe you're worth it
because your work is special - maybe not. I guess because you've persisted in
the position, you must have value for which the hassle is worth it. Not
everyone has that luxury, alas ..

~~~
makmanalp
I would be inclined to agree with you, but this just isn't true in my case and
many other cases - usually the people who care the most are the ones I have to
work with the least. When I have a meeting, I suck it up and come in on time.
But otherwise, there really is no reason I even have to be physically in the
office. There are benefits to it, and I like being in the office because it
lets me interact with people in ways that I think makes me better at my job,
but really I could be on the other side of the world and it'd be fine.

We still ape the rituals of our industrial revolution predecessors simply
because no one tried anything else.

~~~
fit2rule
>usually the people who care the most are the ones I have to work with the
least.

Its not necessarily rational - or else if it were, we wouldn't have to deal
with this at all, and everyone could just work whenever they felt like it.
This is an ingrained, subconscious agreement that we all work as hard as we
can and nobody slacks off - alas, having schedule conflicts are an easy way to
say "I don't think you work as hard as you should" .. and the corollary: "I
don't think I should have to work as hard as you think I should" ..

------
achompas
This article made the rounds among co-workers a few months back. Finally took
some time to read it and I thought it was excellent.

Briefly: the article suggests the existence of two different thought patterns,
mapping and packing. Packing involves cataloging knowledge packets and
accessing them in a straightforward way, without considering why things are
true or how ideas fit together across disciplines. Mapping involves reflecting
on truths to build a map of relationships between them, and updating your
representation of that map as you learn new things.

I found mapping to be a super-powerful framework for thinking about things
effectively. Some of the article felt reductionist, but it's a fascinating
read.

------
osullivj
This was on Slashdot back in 99:
[http://news.slashdot.org/story/99/10/26/137207/beyond-the-
pr...](http://news.slashdot.org/story/99/10/26/137207/beyond-the-programmers-
stone)

