It's been a while since I talked about
the theories behind the work we do at IRI, and I think it's about
time to resume. Previously, I reviewed different thinking styles people use to interact with the world. Now
clearly, given IRI's focus on ABC thinking, we have a preference when
it comes to which style we promote, but before I get into the details
of why, I want to take a moment to discuss a closely related
issue—the way we learn and understand ideas. In the work we do,
discussions in this area usually produce the most positive feedback
and results, and I cannot understate how important it is to our work.
Onward, then.
Direct Understanding
So let's say there is an idea I want
(or need) to understand (we will refer to this generic idea as “I”).
There are three ways I can understand this idea. First, I can
understand it directly. That is, I have a fully developed concept
about the idea, understand its impact on other ideas, and feel
comfortable modifying my concept to adapt to new information. Direct
understanding, which I will also refer to as conceptualization, can
be illustrated as follows:
Note the arrows go both ways; I
understand the idea, and I can, in turn, do things with the idea
(modify it, update, or otherwise adapt it to new circumstances). In
short, I understand, and can use the idea—the idea is my
idea.
Indirect Understanding
Now let's look at another scenario. In
this case, I don't know the idea and need to go to another person to
understand it. This other person (or institution) is someone I know
and rely on for information (for this illustration, it doesn't matter
if I should trust my teacher, only that I do). The
teacher, understanding the idea, can communicate it to me. This can be
illustrated as follows:
Now, you'll notice a couple of
differences in this diagram. While the teacher has a direct
understanding of the material, and I have a direct connection to the
teacher, the teacher is simply imparting information to me. That is,
the information I have isn't something I understand directly, but
indirectly through the teacher. This means that all I understand
about the idea is what the teacher has given me. I am dependent on
the teacher for my idea, and I cannot modify, adapt, or change the
idea, since it is not mine, but my teacher's. We call this
Indirect Understanding, which we sometimes refer to as definitional understanding (as definitions in the dictionary only change slowly and
with much fuss). At this point, I only know what I have been taught,
and I cannot deviate from my teaching.
Direct vs. Indirect
To illustrate the difference between a
direct and indirect understanding, consider the difference between normal office workers using their computers and members of
the Information Technology (IT) department. The office worker probably doesn't know too much
about computers, overall—he or she might be able to turn them on
and make them run the required programs, but if something goes wrong,
the worker is stuck and has to call IT. In the best case (let's be
optimistic here), the IT worker listens to the problem, diagnoses the
situation, and instructs the office worker on how to make the
computer start working again. At this point, the office worker can
fix the problem, but probably still doesn't understand
the problem. The office worker has an indirect understanding of what
to do—he or she only knows what IT said to do, and does what IT
says to make things work. IT, by contrast, has a direct understanding
of the computer's operations, and can identify the problem, formulate a
solution specific to that problem, and instruct the office worker on
how to fix it (again, best case scenario here). Direct understanding
allows us to problem solve and adapt—we gain new ways of thinking; indirect understanding just gives us new things to think about. The difference between the two is the difference between how to think and what to think.
Wrapping Up
Clearly, a direct understanding of an
idea is superior to an indirect understanding in terms of utility and
development. Initially, we all learn about ideas indirectly—someone
else tells us something new, and now we have more information than
before. The goal then becomes to move from indirect understanding to
direct understanding. We want to go from knowing data to
comprehending concepts. Gaining a direct understanding should be the
goal of every learner...and helping others acquire a direct
understanding should be the goal of every teacher. It is critical
that we keep this in mind when talking about the importance of ABC
thinking. Next time, I hope to discuss how this idea of direct and
indirect understanding relates to our identity and our sense of worth
and ability.
Posts
