All of this is publicly known. See: fortelabs.co/blog/the-story
Once you understand this context, criticism like “PS is bad for thinking” appear silly.
That’s not the goal. That’s like saying “the Toyota Production System is bad at making art.”
Conversation
The goal of PS is to reduce the waste of constantly going back to source material.
You don’t want to do over-eager summarisation. But you also don’t want to do too little, which means you would have to go back and reread the source text all over again.
That is muda.
1
1
Why do I feel this keenly? A few years ago, I wrote a series titled A Framework for Putting Mental Models to Practice. commoncog.com/blog/a-framewo
As part of my research, I read a 600 page textbook of judgment and decision making titled Thinking and Deciding.
1
1
I used many of its ideas in the series.
But of course, this is a TEXTBOOK. It covers everything there is to know about an entire academic subfield.
Everything from expected utility calculations to cognitive biases, to philosophical treatments in the topic.
1
I used only a subset of the ideas in my series.
It’s no accident that those are the ideas I remember best.
Because I wasn’t yet doing PS, I have no ability to recall any of the other ideas in the book.
This is waste.
1
I am likely going to have to reread whole sections of the book, if I want to reference it again.
It’s almost as if my earlier research never happened.
I feel those hours keenly.
1
One reason I look closely at the output of productivity writers is due to stories like this.
Do they have a history of producing highly integrative, novel work, at a high enough throughput?
If they do not, it is not likely that they have ideas valuable enough to offer me.
2
Replying to
In Judo, good coaches must be previous competitors. Absolutely! They need not need to be the best, but they should demonstrate prior competitive skill, even if they are not champions.
2
Replying to
Maybe judo has terrible coaches. Look at Alex Ferguson’s playing career v coaching career. Or mourinho
2
1