Thanks for addressing this topic, I love it. I've given it some thought and I'd like to map mine according to your Key Takeaways section.
1. Speak to the Lowest Common Denominator: "It's not my problem if they don’t understand" is something I have encountered many times as well. My current understanding is that it's a two-person dance. Your patience and willingness to scaffold for their understanding contrasts with their own patience in learning before heuristically falling into apprehension bias. As you're a public communicator, you take a lot more flak and I understand it's high friction point for you; I have the informal freedom to take my time and use epistemic tools to make the concepts understandable in one-on-one settings.
2. Being Right Too Early Is The Same As Being Wrong: Social pressure is built in your work and that too I emphasize with. My own take is "Being Right Too Early Means I Have to Wait for Others to Catch Up." Idealistic? Maybe. In the frontier of epistemology, apprehension bias is expected; others simply lack the necessary frame of reference. How could they know what they haven't yet experienced?
3. People Always Project Their Limitations First: It's more than casual projection, I'd say; if viewed through Jungian principles, it reflects other people's shadowed Ti (Introverted Thinking) at work. The cognitive function of Ti as a shadow manifests as the internal critique of "you're just overthinking," and that’s where that projected apprehension comes from. You put significant effort into your architecture, and all they did was read it, then dismiss it as nonsense. It’s frustrating. The upside is as you’ve highlighted: implementation of your work serves as proof in hindsight.
Good thing I can still comment here now that you’ve locked off comments on that other volatile social platform. I'm a fan of your writings and Youtube video, keep it going Dave.
I wonder if laughing out loud is a typical reaction to reading your brilliant account of the human comedy you so insightfully describe. All I know is that's what I just did.
You perfectly capture my professional and personal experiences over my four score and ten.
Thanks for the diagnosis and also the therapeutic response. It is indeed difficult to persevere when you see things that others don't, and vindication by reality many years down the road is cold comfort for the visionary. Your essay helps.
Even better, you offer some practical techniques for overcoming the challenge. The first step as in all problems is to understand the psychology of the interlocutor. Your analysis is essential in that regard.
Being right too early is the same as being wrong 🎯
"One can fight evil but against stupidity one is helpless."
- Henry Miller
Once we imagined baseball, football, and so forth to be life’s top sports - not realizing that the sport of wrong-making towers miles over them.
Thanks for addressing this topic, I love it. I've given it some thought and I'd like to map mine according to your Key Takeaways section.
1. Speak to the Lowest Common Denominator: "It's not my problem if they don’t understand" is something I have encountered many times as well. My current understanding is that it's a two-person dance. Your patience and willingness to scaffold for their understanding contrasts with their own patience in learning before heuristically falling into apprehension bias. As you're a public communicator, you take a lot more flak and I understand it's high friction point for you; I have the informal freedom to take my time and use epistemic tools to make the concepts understandable in one-on-one settings.
2. Being Right Too Early Is The Same As Being Wrong: Social pressure is built in your work and that too I emphasize with. My own take is "Being Right Too Early Means I Have to Wait for Others to Catch Up." Idealistic? Maybe. In the frontier of epistemology, apprehension bias is expected; others simply lack the necessary frame of reference. How could they know what they haven't yet experienced?
3. People Always Project Their Limitations First: It's more than casual projection, I'd say; if viewed through Jungian principles, it reflects other people's shadowed Ti (Introverted Thinking) at work. The cognitive function of Ti as a shadow manifests as the internal critique of "you're just overthinking," and that’s where that projected apprehension comes from. You put significant effort into your architecture, and all they did was read it, then dismiss it as nonsense. It’s frustrating. The upside is as you’ve highlighted: implementation of your work serves as proof in hindsight.
Good thing I can still comment here now that you’ve locked off comments on that other volatile social platform. I'm a fan of your writings and Youtube video, keep it going Dave.
Apprehension bias feels spot on.... people confuse their limits with the limits of reality. Naming it makes the pattern hard to unsee.
I wonder if laughing out loud is a typical reaction to reading your brilliant account of the human comedy you so insightfully describe. All I know is that's what I just did.
You perfectly capture my professional and personal experiences over my four score and ten.
Thanks for the diagnosis and also the therapeutic response. It is indeed difficult to persevere when you see things that others don't, and vindication by reality many years down the road is cold comfort for the visionary. Your essay helps.
Even better, you offer some practical techniques for overcoming the challenge. The first step as in all problems is to understand the psychology of the interlocutor. Your analysis is essential in that regard.
That definitely happens. Like "I fully inhabit your perspective and it's still incomprehensible"