Don’t assume you “know” how things are going to turn out. Ask.

 

Be your own devil’s advocate.

Psychologists call this process “dialectical bootstrapping” and studies have shown that it can improve a single person’s judgments by encouraging broad-minded thinking and a consideration of all the facts.
We know that, in the right conditions, the summed wisdom of a group of people is superior to the judgment of any person deciding alone. But not all of us have the benefit of a trusty committee to navigate us through each day. An alternative approach is to summon the crowd within.
Let’s say you need to decide how many orders to make for a product used in your work. Ask yourself once and write down your answer. Now assume this first estimate was wrong and think about the reasons this might be.  In other words, put yourself in the shoes of someone inclined to disagree with you. Take these two results and walk through the logic for each. The combined insight gained can help you form a better-informed decision.
Squash your biases.
Suppose I told you I’m sitting opposite a man who is wearing glasses and listening to Mozart. Do you think it’s more likely that he’s a literature professor or a truck driver? If you choose the former, you’ve just fallen for what psychologists call “base-rate neglect”. The “base-rate” is the likelihood for the most important factors at play.
As Rolf Dobelli explains in The Art of Thinking Clearly (from which the example is taken) – there are vastly more truck drivers than literature professors, so even allowing for stereotypes, it’s far more likely the man is a trucker than a professor. When making judgments for your business or career, it’s always worth remembering the base rate – most books never get published, most tech start-ups fail, most MBA students end up working in middle management. This isn’t to demoralize you, but to help guard against reckless unrealistic optimism. As Dobelli says, “When you hear hoofbeats, don’t expect a zebra.”

Stop thinking about it.

Sometimes if we think too hard on a problem we can get stuck in a mental dead end. One antidote is to distract ourselves from making a judgment and let our non-conscious minds do the work. Research suggests this can be especially advantageous if you have relevant expertise and you’re attempting to make an accurate prediction about the future – which book cover design is likely to be most effective, say, or which candidate will be most suitable for your team.
This idea of “not thinking” about a problem is based on psychologist Ap Dijksterhuis’ Unconscious Thought Theory. In one relevant study he showed that people with soccer expertise made more accurate predictions about upcoming results in a Dutch league if they distracted themselves for two minutes before making their judgment calls. “… Unconscious thought may well be helpful in more situations than some people currently think,” Dijksterhuis and his team wrote at the time (99U covered this phenomenon here).

Adopt an emotionally ambiguous attitude.

Our emotional state affects the way we approach decisions. Generally speaking, we tend to be more focused and analytical when we’re sad, and more reliant on gut instincts when we’re happy. Which emotional state is optimal when making professional judgments? Well, both.
An intriguing study published earlier this year by researchers at the Michigan Ross School of Business showed that people made more accurate predictions and answered more general knowledge questions correctly when they were in an “emotionally ambiguous” state – feeling both happy and sad at the same time. The state was triggered by having participants write about a time they’d felt that way – you could do the same.
For example, think back to when you left high school and you were sad to leave your friends, but happy about the freedom and opportunities ahead. Further analysis by the researchers suggested the improved judgment accuracy was because people in an emotionally ambiguous state were more open-minded and receptive to useful information. In other words, you were able to capture the best of both sadness and happiness. “The ambivalent mind can be a wise mind,” Ross and his team said.

We tend to be more focused and analytical when we’re sad, and more reliant on gut instincts when we’re happy.

***

Human judgment is flawed but we don’t have to be defeatist. The techniques above represent just some of the ways – based on psychology research – that we can optimize our judgments and decisions. Now, the next time you’re faced with a tough choice you’ll be well-armed.

Satan’s Arsenal

To be able to understand how a person, or a church, can behave as the one just discussed, we need to take inventory of Satan’s arsenal to find out what his weapons are and how he uses them against the saints.
Satan has three main weapons. The most obvious is sin. Satan is known as the tempter (see Matt. 4:3), and this is because of the expertise with which he uses this particular weapon. Sin is an active weapon. Like a guided missile, it seeks you. When it hits you, you know it immediately, because the wages of sin is death (see Rom. 6:23).
The second weapon is a passive one. Like a trap, it is surreptitiously set up for you to fall into. It is called “accusations.” Satan is described in the Bible as the accuser of the brethren (see Job 1:6-12; Zech. 3:1; Rev. 12:10). This is what he does, day and night, before the throne of God. If he has the courage to do that before God (who knows all the facts inside out), imagine what is he capable of doing to you and me, mere mortals. Even though we are forgiven, he reminds us of every sin we have committed, and then, for effect, he adds every other sin we could have committed. We are called by God by name, but Satan shouts at us that we have been forsaken, that we are not good enough for the ministry. Even though we are protected by the One who has said, “Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you” (Heb. 13:5, NIV), he uses the problems and challenges we face every day as a ramrod to blind us to the solidity of that promise. “God has left you,” he screams in our ear. “You are too bad.”
Satan uses accusations to generate anxiety strong enough so we will come out from under the mighty hand of God (see 1 Pet. 5:6). This is why Peter admonishes us, “Casting all your anxiety upon Him, because He cares for you” (1 Pet. 5:7). Satan’s objective is to paralyze us, very much like an animal that has fallen into a trap (see 2 Tim. 2:26; 1 Pet. 5:8,9). Likewise, we know when this weapon has been used against us successfully, because we lose our freedom of movement in Christ. Creeping anxiety takes over. Fear replaces faith, and despair overtakes hope (see 2 Tim. 1:7).
The Church in general is very much aware of these two weapons. Adequate Bible teaching helps to deal with their effect on us and how to defend against them. The fact that the consequences suffered by the victims are visible—death and spiritual paralysis—acts as a motivator for people to seek help. However, Satan’s third weapon is the most dangerous. This particular weapon is virtually unknown to the average Christian. It is neither active nor passive, but dormant. Like an underwater mine, it can be planted and left undetected, waiting for the ideal moment to be activated. Because it is dormant, it is easy for the devil to conceal it from us. We usually find out about it when we survey the destruction it has wreaked on us. This devastating weapon is called “spiritual strongholds” (see 2 Cor. 10:4,5). It allows Satan to control Christians and make them do things that bring great damage to themselves and to others. He uses it to impeach our testimony, much like the DA in the opening story. It exposes a severe inconsistency between who we say we are and what we believe. Spiritual strongholds represent a state-of-the-art manifestation of deceit. This is consistent with Satan’s treacherous character because he is also called the deceiver (see John 8:44; Rev. 12:9).

Strongholds: What They Are and How to Pull Them Down

PRINCIPLE: Spiritual strongholds are Satan’s secret weapon. It is through the surreptitious use of strongholds that Satan controls the behavior of the Church. They must be identified and destroyed.

The witness stand is an important part of the judicial process. When someone is called to testify in a case, the court clerk swears him in. With a hand on the Bible, the witness promises “to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God.” He is then led through his testimony by the lawyer for the party that called him as a witness. This is the easy part. The hard part comes when the lawyer for the other party cross-examines him. It is hard because the objective of the cross-examination is two-fold: to find inconsistencies in the witness’s testimony, and to discredit the witness. The latter is usually done by attacking his character. If either one of these objectives is accomplished during the cross-examination, his testimony then becomes useless.
Picture for a moment a key witness in a case involving the possibility of capital punishment; if the defendant is found guilty, he may be sent to the electric chair. This particular witness is testifying for the defense, and his testimony is crucial to save the accused. As he approaches the witness stand, a sense of immediacy grabs everyone in the courtroom. Everything hangs on the balance of what he is about to say. This is where the defendant makes or breaks it.
The witness gives an excellent testimony. He says the right words and brings the right facts to bear on his story, ably lead by the defense counsel. But now the district attorney begins the cross-examination.
In a booming voice he declares, “Mr. Witness, I will not try to punch holes in your story. However, I believe that you are a liar, and I will prove it.” Then he goes on to ask three simple questions: “Are you rich? Do you have clothes on? Is your eyesight normal?” To these questions, the witness answers with an emphatic yes. With a slight smile of satisfaction, the district attorney now moves in for the kill. He asks the witness the color of the tie worn by the defendant, who sits a few feet from the witness stand. No answer comes forth. The witness is totally blind, in spite of what he just said. Next the district attorney provides the court with Exhibit A, consisting of pictures that show the witness panhandling. This is accompanied by an affidavit signed by the director of the local rescue mission stating that the witness is currently living off the mission’s charity. Finally, the DA asks the witness to stand up, and, to everybody’s amazement, he is stark naked. His credibility has been destroyed. It doesn’t matter if what he testified is true; no one will believe it.
Is it possible for someone to be blind and not know it? To be miserably poor and believe otherwise? To think in all honesty that he is dressed and to walk around naked? Yes, it is entirely possible. It happens every day. Where? In our churches. In fact, the problem is so serious that the Lord Jesus Himself sent a letter to a particular church, confronting it with this severe form of spiritual schizophrenia. Recorded in Revelation 3:14-22, the letter says:
“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this: ‘I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I would that you were cold or hot. So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth. Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked, I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire, that you may become rich, and white garments, that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and eyesalve to anoint your eyes, that you may see. Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; be zealous therefore, and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him, and will dine with him, and he with Me. He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’”
The situation was so serious that Jesus told them, “You think you have gathered in My name, but I have been left out” (see Rev. 3:20). Can you imagine Jesus shut out of His own Church?
In Revelation 12:11, we are told that our victory over Satan consists of three elements: the blood of Jesus, our testimony and our willingness to die. One element is constant, the remaining two being variable. The blood of the lamb is the constant because it represents a perfect sacrifice. However, our testimony and our willingness to die for Jesus, if necessary, are vulnerable to change. This is where Satan—the accuser, the spiritual district attorney—aims his attack.

Don’t assume you “know” how things are going to turn out. Ask--Tough Choices: The Science Behind Making The Right Call

 

Be your own devil’s advocate.

Psychologists call this process “dialectical bootstrapping” and studies have shown that it can improve a single person’s judgments by encouraging broad-minded thinking and a consideration of all the facts.
We know that, in the right conditions, the summed wisdom of a group of people is superior to the judgment of any person deciding alone. But not all of us have the benefit of a trusty committee to navigate us through each day. An alternative approach is to summon the crowd within.
Let’s say you need to decide how many orders to make for a product used in your work. Ask yourself once and write down your answer. Now assume this first estimate was wrong and think about the reasons this might be.  In other words, put yourself in the shoes of someone inclined to disagree with you. Take these two results and walk through the logic for each. The combined insight gained can help you form a better-informed decision.
Squash your biases.
Suppose I told you I’m sitting opposite a man who is wearing glasses and listening to Mozart. Do you think it’s more likely that he’s a literature professor or a truck driver? If you choose the former, you’ve just fallen for what psychologists call “base-rate neglect”. The “base-rate” is the likelihood for the most important factors at play.
As Rolf Dobelli explains in The Art of Thinking Clearly (from which the example is taken) – there are vastly more truck drivers than literature professors, so even allowing for stereotypes, it’s far more likely the man is a trucker than a professor. When making judgments for your business or career, it’s always worth remembering the base rate – most books never get published, most tech start-ups fail, most MBA students end up working in middle management. This isn’t to demoralize you, but to help guard against reckless unrealistic optimism. As Dobelli says, “When you hear hoofbeats, don’t expect a zebra.”

Stop thinking about it.

Sometimes if we think too hard on a problem we can get stuck in a mental dead end. One antidote is to distract ourselves from making a judgment and let our non-conscious minds do the work. Research suggests this can be especially advantageous if you have relevant expertise and you’re attempting to make an accurate prediction about the future – which book cover design is likely to be most effective, say, or which candidate will be most suitable for your team.
This idea of “not thinking” about a problem is based on psychologist Ap Dijksterhuis’ Unconscious Thought Theory. In one relevant study he showed that people with soccer expertise made more accurate predictions about upcoming results in a Dutch league if they distracted themselves for two minutes before making their judgment calls. “… Unconscious thought may well be helpful in more situations than some people currently think,” Dijksterhuis and his team wrote at the time.

NB: WATCH OUT FOR Adopt an emotionally ambiguous attitude
All by Christian  Jarrett

HOW WE SEE PEOPLE DEPENDS ON THE WINDOW WE ARE LOOKING THROUGH

A young couple moved into a new neighbourhood. The next morning while eating breakfast, the young woman saw her neighbour through the glass window hanging the clothes outside.
"That laundry is not clean," she said. "She doesn't know how to wash correctly. Perhaps she needs better laundry soap".
Her husband looked on, but remained silent. Every time the neighbour would hang laundry to dry, the young woman would make the same comments.
About one month later, the woman was surprised to see nice clean wash on the line and said to her husband: "Look, she has learnt how to wash correctly. I wonder who taught her this!"
The husband replied: "I got up early this morning and cleaned our windows."
And so it is with life. What we see when watching others depends on the purity of the window through which we look.
It is easy to discuss other people, their lives and things that don't really concern us.
Yet we tend to forget- our window isn't that clean after all.
Clean up your window to give you a clearer view of who people are before you comment on them...

GOD BLESS YOU!!!

Tough Choices: The Science Behind Making The Right Call

Keep your friends close, you'll need them when it comes time to make a tough decision.

Our lives are filled with one decision after another. Many are trivial but every now and then, a biggie comes along, one where you just know that you’re about to irreversibly shape your own future.

The bad news is our decision-making is hampered by the fog of human irrationality. Fortunately, science has shown us that there are tricks and habits we can use to improve our judgments and better light the path ahead.

Phone a friend.

We’re hopeless at predicting how future circumstances will affect us emotionally – this is what psychologists call “affective forecasting.” At a general level, most of us overestimate the impact of future events, good or bad. Think of the times you made a decision you had been putting off. When all was settled you likely thought, “That wasn’t so bad.” This myopia is accompanied by misplaced confidence in our own predicative abilities, so that our instinct is to rely on our own forecasts rather than finding out how the same experience affected others, especially when it comes to life’s big decisions.
If you want to know how you’ll feel if you take a given path, research suggests you should acknowledge your own biases and find out how a friend or neighbor felt after they made the same decision that you are considering. Moving to a new city? Ask someone that lives there. Looking for a new job in a certain field? Ask some new hires what they’d suggest. Don’t assume you “know” how things are going to turn out. Ask.

Don’t assume you “know” how things are going to turn out. Ask.  

By Christian Jarrett 

TO BE CONTINUED

How To Learn From Your Mistakes

Involved mistakes

The third pile of mistakes, Involved mistakes, requires significant changes to avoid. These are mistakes we tend to make through either habit or nature. But since change is so much harder than we admit, we often suffer through the same mistakes again and again instead of making the tough changes needed to avoid them.
Difficultly with change involves an earlier point made in this essay. Some feel that to agree to change means there is something wrong with them. “If I’m perfect, why would I need to change?” Since they need to protect their idea of perfection, they refuse change (Or possibly, even refuse to admit they did anything wrong).
But this is a trap: refusing to acknowledge mistakes, or tendencies to make similar kinds of mistakes, is a refusal to acknowledge reality. If you can’t see the gaps, flaws, or weaknesses in your behavior you’re forever trapped in the same behavior and limitations you’ve always had, possibly since you were a child (When someone tells you you’re being a baby, they might be right).
Another challenge to change is that it may require renewing commitments you’ve broken before, from the trivial “Yes, I’ll try to remember to take the trash out” to the more serious “I’ll try to stop sleeping with all of your friends”. This happens in any environment: the workplace, friendships, romantic relationships or even commitments you’ve made to yourself. Renewing commitments can be tough since it requires not only admitting to the recent mistake, but acknowledging similar mistakes you’ve made before. The feelings of failure and guilt become so large that we don’t have the courage to try again.
This is why success in learning from mistakes often requires involvement from other people, either for advice, training or simply to keep you honest. A supportive friend’s, mentor’s or professional’s perspective on your behavior will be more objective than your own and help you identify when ytou’re hedging, breaking or denying the commitments you’ve made.
In moments of weakness the only way to prevent a mistake is to enlist someone else. “Fred, I want to play my Gamecube today but I promised Sally I wouldn’t. Can we hang out so you can make sure I don’t do it today?” Admitting you need help and asking for it often requires more courage than trying to do it on your own.
The biggest lesson to learn in involved mistakes is that you have to examine your own ability to change. Some kinds of change will be easier for you than others and until you make mistakes and try to correct them you won’t know which they are.