think clearly

I met a couple of folks who are part of a sports club last week in Delhi. They were in the middle of a Cricket tournament. When I asked them how it was going for them, they told me they weren't winning a lot. When I asked why, they said, "The squad is not motivated enough, we think."

Just now I happened to read a note from a scientist on 'Abstract Entities' - "Entities like Atoms or Enzymes. Has anybody ever seen an atom or enzyme? Has anybody talked to them or touched them? They probably do exist but we know it through logic and not through any direct information? so in difficult sciences when we are able to no longer use our senses we embark on to use abstract entities."


We all trust on abstract entities as everything cannot be verified by direct observation. so a statement like 'squad is not motivated' is fuzzy logic. This is circular logic. it's a trap. Not winning because not motivated. In a regular environment, so we might embark on working on 'motivation exercises'. Whereas the real cause may be that they aren't motivated because the matches are played on Sundays and they rather be with their families.

We need to be very scrupulous with abstract entities. Ask yourself - Why do we accept it? How do we know the squad didn't have enough motivation? The answer most likely is, "They lost the game, didn't they?" - Circular Logic.

The reason I am pointing all this out is that 'circular logic' prevents clear thinking and so prevents breakthroughs.

The key to a breakthrough is very simple - embarrassingly simple - avoid circular logic - that's all. Never say, 'I know because of this'

I was consulting with a software company sometime back who were experiencing lower sales in a particular product. When I asked them why are the sales down. Their reply was that the market is changing. Can you see that - Circular Logic - you do not have a root cause. There can be plenty of reasons - like a downturn in economy, or new competition, or deterioration in service or increase in prices. There was no attempt or reason to prefer any among these over the other.

On deeper analysis we figured additional effect as a result of declining sales. The sales of additional alternative product increased by a similar amount. What next? This again comes back to the cause that market taste is changing. You see they weren't losing overall so it was ok to conclude this. evidently in a situation as this the only plausible explanation is that market conditions have changed. even so what is the cause for the cause. Is it significant?

Whenever you see yourself concluding an argument on an 'abstract entity' or 'circular logic' be rest assured you putting aside a breakthrough for the taking.

When we made the senior management turn over deeper into this particular 'low sales of a product' - it was discovered that because of a launch of the new product, the marketing squad was hyping it by offering attractive discounts and launch offers. This resulted in a self compete situation where the market preferred a new and cheaper product which does about 85% of the job. Yes, evidently the market taste is changing but we now have a root cause. So where is the breakthrough?

Once they knew this, they realized, they are able to't sell both products and sustain sales. We decided then to stop selling the first product and give it for free and sell services related to it. This was aimed at a different market - the one's who needed the missing 15% performance. The price of this was almost doubled. Two things happened - The new product sold more as it was now less confusing for everyone, within and outside. Secondly the new division was created to sell services - with a lot higher profitability. They outsold the previous sales highs of this product in no time at all.

You see whenever one applies circular logic - it does not get substantiated. To make sense one requires to substantiate a cause (for instance substantiate market taste). To substantiate a cause additional effect is needed (for instance increase in sales of additional product) that can be verified by direct observation. Otherwise we will forever be faced with a dead end. More importantly we will be ignoring the opportunity for a breakthrough.

This is true for everything. Look around you, think - look on decisions, problems... anything. Let's see.

Business is down because economy is down. (Abstract - Economy is down from 9 to 7% - I bet your business is more down than that)!!!!

I work long hours because I have much to do. (Get real - you work long hours because either its work culture for your company or you are poor at time management or you cannot say no to work or you are avoiding going home early or you are just plain slow and lazy)

I prefer to embark on reading but I just do not have the time (Circular - Cannot read, no time. No time so how can I read. In a recent coaching session we figured that hiring a driver freed two hours for a person to read.)

Weight problem is genetic. It runs in the family. (Most absurd - Go run before you decide it does)

This can be endless. The point is one requires to be simple about all this. A very simple fact is that a cause will have more than one effect so think both, not just the abstract entity.

I'd like to take one more example to drive a final message. The reason as to why we settle for abstract entities.

The example - the most popular circular logic - "We cannot implement XYZ because folks resist alteration"

What do we mean by folks resisting alteration. Since the statement doesn't quantify itself it basically means that folks may resist almost any alteration under any circumstances - good or bad- even though it may potentially transform their lives.

This is so widely accepted that it's almost crazy. Lets go deeper. What is implied by saying that folks resist alteration? We are in essence saying that folks are conditioned to just simply resist, irrespective of the benefits of the proposed alteration. They just assume otherwise and resist it. folks are programmed to resist. folks includes you and me. You and I so also have an inability to make folks understand 'good alteration'. Isn't this all very silly? What are we doing? Does this say good things about folks? Not really. This is derogatory. it is a negative manner to behave and / or deal with things both for folks who are resisting and those who are saying it.

In other words folks are comfortable being derogatory about themselves and about other people. That's unfortunately the culture we are part of. In fact this statement is so widely accepted that everyone applies it. So everyone lives this culture.

Therein lies the underlining truth about abstract entity - we use it, accept it because we rather hide behind 'derogatory assumed realities' than in reality alteration things.

We rather accept that we do not have the brains to manage time better, that we will keep looking unfit but blame it on additional generation, that business is down 20% but economy is down 1%, that we are so silly that we will deny ourselves of knowledge from books in the name of working more, that we cannot alteration because folks resist alteration, that we rather further pass derogatory remarks on folks in concluding they're like this or that than in reality resolve an issue, that we rather say that we are entirely helpless than look to alteration additional person's perspective, that we rather accept a compromised life than resolve relationships, that we rather knowingly get addicted to things and further insult ourselves than living healthy............... We are just so comfortable being derogatory about us...............

Why do we do all this? Why do we live in these entities, in circular fuzzy logic? Look there is a potential breakthrough in all of the above statements only if we remover the circular logic and think clearly. But we do not do it. We rather be circular, knowingly derogatory, than clearer. Why? I have been asking this question to myself. I have no answer. in reality I do.

We are very stupid. Almost to the point of not using the brains that we have.

Its simple logic, nevertheless we will nonetheless make an assumption that breakthroughs must be complicated and cannot be so simple. And that's probably because in our minds we do not think we deserve better. Derogatory again!

The easiest and quickest manner to a breakthrough is to remove circular logic and think clearly. it is able to be achieved in a matter of seconds. Remember though that thinking without action has no meaning.