As to why we need multiple modes of thinking, Charles Munger once said:
Problems in the real world are not confined to a certain discipline.
In fact, it's not just a problem, it's not just a subject. When solving problems, we will also be limited to the subjects we are good at and the tools and models we are familiar with.
Many people on the Internet set up a banner to collect 100 thinking models, but after collecting a bunch of models, they can't use them and can't solve the problem.
Sometimes others solve their own problems, ask for advice, and find that others use the model they know.
Why do you learn so many thinking models but can't use them?
Lao Cao believes that he has not achieved "multiple integration."
It is easy to have more models and to "diversify".
Diversification means diversification. Since childhood, we have learned many thinking models, such as probability, compound interest, energy conservation, survival of the fittest, and balance between supply and demand in middle school, which are enough for us to solve most problems in life and work.
But these models are scattered, chaotic and not integrated.
For example.
There will be a comprehensive examination of science and liberal arts in high school. It's diverse to take multiple subjects in one exam, right? But is it integrated?
number
The name is comprehensive, but each subject is taught separately in class, studied separately, tested separately in exams, and explained separately after exams.
Just like a fruit platter, a large plate of all kinds of fruits, many yuan, very beautiful, all on one plate, but when eating? Apple or apple, pear or pear, the disciplinary boundaries are very clear.
What is unity?
One is mixed juice. Whether you are an apple or a pear, whether you are a southern fruit or a northern fruit, whether you are sweet, sour or spicy, they are all broken, mixed together and integrated.
I don't care if you are math or chemistry, physics or geography, put them all together to solve the problem.
Solving problems is the purpose.
Taking problem solving as the starting point of learning model and using model can be comprehensive and diversified without the limitation of disciplines and models.
That's easy to say, so how to turn the fruit bowl into juice and integrate various models?
It can be roughly divided into three steps.
It should be noted that "Poor Charlie's Collection" only says to master interdisciplinary thinking mode, and as for how to mix them, only a list is mentioned.
Lao Cao thinks it is not enough to use only one list. The model was there, the key was how to use it, so he added two more steps.
Still the first sentence, this paragraph, including the whole article, is my personal understanding, and there must be mistakes and shortcomings. So if you have different opinions, or have anything to say, please leave a message.
As mentioned earlier, the thinking model wants more and more, which is very simple. Learn. But the key is to use it, and it is all used.
Charles Munger put it this way:
Then how do you use all the models you have mastered? I summarized three steps:
Find * * * sex, problem decomposition, and use lists.
When discussing experts, the idiom used in front is: draw inferences from one instance, draw inferences from another instance.
The premise of doing these two things is to find * * *.
There are many modes of thinking in different disciplines, and if you pursue quantity, you will never finish learning. But if we can find similarities, we can understand other models well.
When solving problems, it is also easier to call the thinking models of other disciplines according to * * *.
Give a few examples.
I taught myself Photoshop more than ten years ago. At that time, there were no online courses and teaching videos, only a graphic tutorial.
It was difficult to read at first, and the text of the tutorial was not easy to understand, but when I saw the section "Layers", I suddenly felt suddenly enlightened.
Because I thought of slides, not PPT, but physical slides in the real world.
When I was in junior high school, I put a slide projector and a few slides in the classroom, which is a very advanced multimedia teaching.
How to use the slide projector? It is to play different images, that is, slides, by switching and overlapping plastic images.
I found that Photoshop layers and slides are * * *:
-the superposition of layers, just like the superposition of slides, the top will cover the bottom.
-Layer modification, like slide modification, does not affect other layers.
The principle of channel and mask is similar.
After finding this * * * sex, I quickly got started with Photoshop.
Later, I used Photoshop to do GIF animation, and I thought of hand painting.
In front of the screen, you may also draw a picture when you are absent from class.
How is the animation effect of hand flip painting formed? It is formed by overlapping and covering multiple pages, and one page is a frame.
In Photoshop, one layer is a frame, and one layer is constantly superimposed to form a GIF animation.
After discovering the * * * essence of hand flip painting, I also quickly learned to make GIF animation with Photoshop.
Photoshop and slides are an example of the existence of * * * between software and objects, virtual and reality.
There is also a lot of sex between disciplines.
Speaking of protection, what can you think of?
In middle school, we learned all kinds of conservation: energy conservation, mass conservation, heat conservation, electricity conservation and momentum conservation. ...
These concepts come from different disciplines, but their uniqueness is obvious: conservation.
Grasping this * * *, these concepts can be said to be all-encompassing. If one problem is solved, the others will be solved easily, but the formulas and theorems used are different.
Similar to conservation, there is a balance.
I remember that there was a lesson in biology class in middle school about osmosis, when cells lose water and when they absorb water. Finding out whether it is water loss or water absorption is actually very simple, that is, balance. Water flows from low concentration to high concentration, and finally the concentration of liquid inside and outside the cell tends to balance.
There is also physical balance, such as electrostatic balance. Like osmosis, if the charge distribution is uneven and the concentration is high or low, the charge will move in a balanced direction.
The same is true of the balance between supply and demand in political textbooks, from high to low, reaching a balance.
Balance is the content of the above three different subjects.
I believe that in your work, study and life, you have also found many things. At the moment when we discovered * * *, strange things and familiar things had a new connection, and our cognition of strange things also improved several levels at once.
Through * * *, we can link the knowledge and models of different disciplines and fields to form a cognitive network with * * * as the node.
Yes, it must be the internet. Because a model may be related to many disciplines, a model will have many different models.
After forming a connected network, knowledge and models are no longer isolated and limited, and it is possible to achieve mastery.
"Problems in the real world will not be confined to a certain discipline." Another way of saying this sentence is that the problems in the real world are mixed.
The problem in the real world is not a comprehensive examination of science with clear subjects. You can tell at a glance that this is a physics problem and that is a geography problem. This is a literature exam and that is a chemistry exam.
The problems in the real world are mixed, and the knowledge and model of a single discipline can't be solved, which requires a model of multiple thinking.
However, the problems are mixed and intertwined, and the multi-thinking mode cannot be started.
What should we do?
Spinning, cocoon peeling and decomposition.
Decomposition is probably the most commonly used and effective method to solve problems.
We had a study breakdown at school.
For example, factorization of mathematics decomposes complex polynomials into simple products.
For example, physical stress analysis should break the whole into parts and analyze them part by part.
Complex problems in work also need to be decomposed.
For example, I opened an online shop with 654.38+ million visitors every day, but in the end only 654.38+000 people placed orders. What's wrong? Many people will put forward a funnel model, which is actually to decompose the transformation process of consumers.
For example, the company has 654.38 million members, but its performance growth is at a bottleneck. How to tap the potential of members? Many people will put forward RFM mode, which is actually a decomposition of member composition.
When we break down the mixed problem, we can know which small problems and small links this problem is composed of, and then we can see which models are needed to solve each small problem and small link until the problem is solved.
For example, through the funnel model, it is found that many visitors enter the product details page, but few people add shopping carts, then the details page is definitely problematic. The next step is how to improve the conversion rate of the detail page, and how to improve it? You may need the heat map and browsing contact rate of the detail page, you may need to conduct an A/B test, you may need a little knowledge of behavior design, and you may need some marketing activities. ...
Now, this particular problem is the * * * relationship between methods and models.
As long as we can find specific problems, we can use various models to solve them.
Decomposition is the way to find specific problems.
Examples of funnel model and RFM model are ready-made analysis model and fixed decomposition program. There are many such models, which can be used directly as long as the conditions are suitable.
But sometimes the problems we encounter will be more complicated, and there may be no ready-made analysis model. But as long as you are more patient and careful, even complex problems can be broken down into specific small problems.
You may have had this feeling, a problem, a mystery. Others solved it, asked for advice, and found that they used the method they knew, but they couldn't remember it.
Why don't you remember?
In one case, I didn't find the connection between the problem and the method, that is, I didn't find * * *, and I didn't know that this method could solve the problem. I didn't know I could use this method until I saw others using it.
In another case, I really can't remember.
Both cases can be solved by model list.
In the third lecture "On Basic and Universal Wisdom" in the Collected Works of Poor Charlie, there are two sentences:
Think of the mental model as a list, that is, a list of models.
So, if you list all the thinking models you have mastered, is it a list of models?
Lao Cao thinks this is not enough. This list is still a fruit bowl, not a multi-integration.
So what is the list of all-in-one models?
A list of models compiled for specific problems.
In Poor Charlie's Collection, there is a list of "investment" made by Charles Munger, which contains various thinking models related to investment, such as compound interest, ability circle and reverse thinking, as well as some warnings and principles.
Because this list already contains all kinds of multiple thinking models related to investment, when you encounter investment-related problems, clicking this list again is calling multiple thinking models, which will not be missed, remembered or limited by a single model.
So how to make this model list? In fact, the first two steps have completed most of the work.
-By looking for * * *, we can penetrate into the thinking mode of all disciplines and fields we have mastered.
-Through problem decomposition, mixed problems can be decomposed into specific problems.
Now we just need to list the models that can solve specific problems.
Let's take the funnel model as an example.
The transformation process of visitors is divided into several links, and the problems in each link can be solved through a series of methods. The serial methods of each link can make a list, and their uniqueness is to solve this problem.
As long as you encounter the same problem next time, you can use this list alone. This list is a list of models for specific problems.
Let's take a look at the evaluation of various thinking modes in Poor Charlie's Collection: they draw lessons from and perfectly integrate many analytical tools, methods and formulas of various traditional disciplines.
Where's our model list? All disciplines have tools, methods and models that can be used to solve specific problems.
Besides, this list is not dead. Whenever we encounter new models and better models, we can add or replace them, so that this list can be constantly updated and there are always the latest and most effective multivariate models.
Let's look at this list according to the standard of "multiple integration":
There may not be many models in the list, but they come from different fields and are diverse, that is, diverse.
Different patterns are not simply listed together, but linked and mixed together because of the nature of * * *.
This * * * is to be able to solve a specific problem and achieve a specific goal.
It's not over yet.
We will encounter many mixed problems in our work and life, which can be decomposed into many specific problems, and each specific problem can be made into a model list. So we will have a lot of model lists.
A model may solve many different problems, so a model will exist in many lists.
Because the problems encountered are mixed, many different model lists need to be called to solve the mixed problems.
Through the model list, all the models we have are related and can be really used.
At this point, I think it can be said that we have really achieved pluralism and really have a pluralistic thinking mode that can be used.
My understanding of multiple thinking modes is almost finished, but there seems to be something missing.
How did you get the model? You can refer to the word "15000" to explain the eighth chapter of Multiple Thinking Mode in depth.