Subjective Thinking: Benefits & Interplay with Objective Thinking

[BobG]

I don't agree that you would not think first. Do you hit the brakes hard for every nylon bag that suddenly appears in your lane?

You don't at least let up on the accelerator in preparation to slam on the brakes during the time you're trying to figure out what object suddenly appeared in your lane?

On the other hand, pity any small child or animal that runs into the road on a windy day when the tumble weeds are blowing all over the place.

There has to be a predisposition - things suddenly appearing in your lane is bad or things suddenly appearing in your lane is to be expected. I think that has a certain amount of objectivity to it.

Unless you're one of those drivers who just doesn't believe unexpected things will suddenly appear in your lane. Kind of like swimming in the ocean and, as a wave carries you higher in the water, you spy a sea monster! You tend to have to slowly eliminate the impossible before realizing (on the next wave) that the sea monster is actually a sea turtle, which isn't all that unusual at sunrise on a nearly abandoned beach in that part of the coast.

 

[Office_Shredder]

There has to be a predisposition - things suddenly appearing in your lane is bad or things suddenly appearing in your lane is to be expected. I think that has a certain amount of objectivity to it.

So? You see the object, and then make a subjective decision of whether to stop. What if it's a squirrel, and you're going 70 down the highway and you're a second away from hitting it? Are you going to cause a pileup in a failed attempt to save the little bugger's life? What if you're just going 40? If you're going 20 is it safe to break hard? These things aren't objective, because you don't have time to figure this kind of stuff out for real.

You're suggesting I see the object, think 'something's in my lane, that's bad' and then... what? Now I actually need to interpret data and react. I need to do some subjective thinking... is it worth stopping for a nylon bag? For a branch that just fell down? For a soccer ball rolling across the street?

 

[Andre]

Learning a skill like driving basically implies eliminating the thinking out of basic procedures, so you can use the brain cells for the important things. One can easily test this by asking the student pilot the name of his mother while he is doing some check in the first couple of trips. He won't know it. However before going solo, he should be able to draw the third root of 81 for instance when doing those checks. After a few hundred hours of flying all drills are done sort of subconsiously. Don't know how it works, but it works.

 

[BobG]

So? You see the object, and then make a subjective decision of whether to stop. What if it's a squirrel, and you're going 70 down the highway and you're a second away from hitting it? Are you going to cause a pileup in a failed attempt to save the little bugger's life? What if you're just going 40? If you're going 20 is it safe to break hard? These things aren't objective, because you don't have time to figure this kind of stuff out for real.

You're suggesting I see the object, think 'something's in my lane, that's bad' and then... what? Now I actually need to interpret data and react. I need to do some subjective thinking... is it worth stopping for a nylon bag? For a branch that just fell down? For a soccer ball rolling across the street?

I'm saying I'm already stopping unless there's an overriding reason not to stop. Yes, once I realize it's just a nylon bag, or once I realize I'm going to be rear-ended by about 20 cars, I choose not to complete the action (but I guarantee the action was already started).

Same when I'm cruising down the right turn lane and a car in the thru lane pulls into the right turn lane without a blinker. Veering right into the cars waiting to get out of a parking lot is bad - worse than running into the side of her car. But veering a little right to give myself time to think is okay (but only because I almost half expect someone to do something stupid and I already know how much room I have to maneuver - and because I don't talk on my cell phone while driving, in which case my reaction would be to say, "I'll be late picking up the kids.")

Car scenarios are bad examples unless you want to use something like exiting the freeway only to see a car driving the wrong way head on towards you up the exit ramp. The objective thinking and decisions have been made before the situation occurs (rear-wheel drive - turn into the skid; front-wheel drive - point the wheels the way you want to go even in a skid; etc).

I'm just saying the event has to be unexpected to rely on subjective thinking. A few of the examples given are just triggers to start some action you've already made a decision about, reasonably because you don't have time for objective reasoning when the event occurs, but preparation is how you inject objective thinking into split second decisions.

 

[BobG]

Except that those are all examples of subjective thinking. You are making a judgement that the bear you've just encountered will react like all other bears to determine how you will respond, without knowing anything about this specific bear.

Step 7 would be the same regardless of whether this method is successful or not.

It's objective thinking based on laws of probability. How could I possibly base any decision on this particular bear (until about the third date or so, anyway).

On the other hand, I can certainly understand a person with the username Moonbear would be frustrated at prospective dates treating you as if you were the average bear.

 

[runner]

When a scientist makes a hypothesis, are they demonstrating intuition from their subjective mind about how they are interpreting the data?

The reason I said that is because at the time when a hypothesis is made, it is essentially the point of view of the researcher/scientist making the claim and that's the definition of subjective (by someone's pov), regardless of the rational process that preceeded it, such as the gathering and interpreting of the data. The hypothesis becomes objective after peers are able to confirm its validity and come to an agreement... that's the very meaning of objective.

 

[CaptainQuasar]

No, that's not the meaning of objective. Lots of people can agree on something that is subjective. "The sun revolves around the Earth", for example. (Though the statement "lots of people agree that X" could be objective, if it's accurate.)

⚛​