For breakthrough creativity- it is best to reason from “first principle”

In an interview with Elon Musk (founder of PayPal and Tesla Motors) done by Kevin Rose there is a great nugget of wisdom about genuine creativity and entrepreneurship. Musk observes that most people reason from “analogy” (this is in some way analogous to that).  This means that most innovation is just next step iteration and not break-through development. By starting with something that “is” one assumes a whole range of assumptions and limitations that almost always go unexamined.  By its very nature reasoning by “analogy” limits our range of solution space.

Musk suggests that it is much better to reason from “first principle” to achieve genuine breakthroughs.  Musk’s Physics background shows very clearly here.  When examining any issue or problem one needs to step back and start from the most basic/fundamental truths we know about the way things work. This drives the examination of all assumptions and looks for solutions that align with these fundamental truths. Look for solutions not tied to an existing solution but start from the most basic principles we know to be true.

He uses the issue of battery packs for electric vehicles as an example. Since battery packs have always been expensive to make; most thought about how to improve them has started from the unexamined assumption that they will always be essentially like that (reason by analogy).  Alternatively, starting from “first principle” one asks what are the basis properties of the battery materials?  What might make them more effective? How can we procure these elements in a less costly way? What basic truths about the manufacture of these packs could reduce manufacturing costs? What other elements could be used? Questions like these, not tied to assumptions about something that already exists, is fertile ground for breakthrough development.

Another “sell-out” in the “pool of despair”

Another “sell-out” in the “pool of despair”

We are all familiar with the move from a stance of non-accountability (victim thinking) to the plane of Practicing Perfection (“Proactive Accountability).  Believing one is a victim strips a person of their own personal power to change. “I’m a victim so somebody else ought to fix things for me,” the path to continued despair.  The mantra of “Proactive Accountability” is what more can I do to rise above my circumstances and achieve the results I desire.

Recently I’ve noticed another mode of thinking that is just as dangerous as believing one is a “victim.”  It is entitlement thinking. Believing one is “entitled” to something is another cognitive defect that keeps people in the “pool of despair.”  Reflect on it for just a minute, if a person believes they are entitled to some perceived benefit, they expect something else or somebody else to deliver the entitlement to them.  They wait (often passively) and expect the “goodies” to be delivered.  It is similar to the victim stance in that a person gives up their own person power to make life better.  If Proactive Accountability moves us out of the victim stance perhaps we need a “Proactive Opportunity” to fix entitlement thinking.  The mantra of Proactive Opportunity might be what more can I do to rise above my circumstances and make the most of the opportunities I have.

Pay particular attention to the language used about either victim thinking or entitlement thinking.  If the language expressed is essentially “I am a victim or “I am entitled” a person has fallen into these cognitive defects. It has become part of their identity so they feel they cannot change it and the give up their personal power to change it.  Note that some people can be victimized without coming to believe they are victims just as some people may be entitled to some benefit without coming to believe they are entitled.