# Thinking outside the box

1. Nov 12, 2016

We're often told that it's helpful to think outside the box. But what is the box we need to think outside of? And what happens when we think inside the box? I've been searching everywhere for the box but I can't find it. Has anybody got it?

2. Nov 12, 2016

### Krylov

It is just management speak, in my opinion. I tend to take users of this phrase less seriously.

3. Nov 12, 2016

### gleem

When we try to solve a problem we may set up constraints or make assumptions consciously or not thus defining a domain or " box" in which only a certain set of solutions are presented.which are not solutions to the problem resulting in paradoxes or contradictions. So thinking outide the box involves examining the assumption and constraints to expand the domain of solutions.

4. Nov 12, 2016

### gleem

An example of such a problem.

A landscaper has just planted 5 rows of 4 trees. His his billing clerk confirms the planting 20 trees at $59.99 each. The landscaper corrects him "no just charge him for 10 trees". The clerk replies " Are you giving him 10 free trees? Is he? 5. Nov 12, 2016 ### 256bits Minimally, the client could argue that he wanted only 8 trees planted under said conditions. 6. Nov 12, 2016 ### zoobyshoe Here's all I can think of: It could be that$59.99 breaks down to $59.99/2, cost of tree plus$59.99/2, cost of labor to plant the tree, so the landscaper may not be giving the client ten free trees, but 20 free trees charging only for planting costs, or alternately, free planting of 20 paid-for trees. The difference might be relevant in that it affects the taxes charged.

7. Nov 12, 2016

### rxrus

What is thinking inside of the box? Not having a full picture?

8. Nov 12, 2016

### DaveC426913

Depends on the context.

In, say, the advertizing industry, it might mean discarding cliches and hackneyed tropes to be replaced with original ideas.

In the science field, thinking outside the box is almost always a rationalization for 'I have not studied the box, and therefore don't know where its boundaries are, what it should contain or what it does not contain, but you're all sheeple and here's my doodle explaining push gravity, PPMs and Cosmological Expansion'

This.

And definitely this.

9. Nov 12, 2016

### DaveC426913

Thinking inside the box:

First thing we do is picture a 4x5 grid, right?
Assumes that the 5 rows are all parallel.
Assumes one tree can only occupy one row.

10. Nov 12, 2016

### houlahound

The phrase IMO is as lame as management demanding a quantum leap in productivity. I'm like sure that's about the smallest increment in improvement current physics can measure.... they never get it.

11. Nov 12, 2016

### Ibix

Agree with @gleem. For example, as I understand it during World War II the Germans were aware of weaknesses in the Enigma cryptographic scheme, but were confident that all they did was take the key space from "insanely huge" to merely "way too big to search in tactically useful time". Turing and company didn't find more weaknesses in the cryptography - they just came up with a truly innovative way to make brute force practical for the rest of it.

The box, in that case, is the prevailing (implicit) assumption that brute force is too slow to search large solution spaces. Inside the box is looking for analytical techniques to cut the size of the space. Outside the box is inventing an electromechanical device to search the solution space for you.

@Krylov is also correct that the term is often used as meaningless management nonsense. And it's certainly a highly subjective term. But I think there is a sensible meaning there.

12. Nov 12, 2016

### gleem

The origin of the phrase might have come from a 1914 puzzle in which the challenge was to connect all 9 dots on 3x3 grid with a continuous line that has a minimum number of segments. .

13. Nov 12, 2016

### houlahound

Platform atheist is another interesting phrase in software engineering.

14. Nov 12, 2016

### DaveC426913

Indeed, that is a great puzzle - deliciously apropos of the phrase 'think outside the box'.

Here it is:

Draw 4 continuous, connected, straight lines, crossing all dots through their centres.

For you nitpickers who like to think too far outside the box :
continuous: no broken lines. A line has exactly one start point and one end point
connected: if you were using a pencil, you would not be able to lift it off the page
straight: self-explanatory
centres: treat the dots as 0 dimensional points

No peeking!

15. Nov 12, 2016

### DaveC426913

Always been platform agnostic where I come form.

16. Nov 12, 2016

### houlahound

Does that make Apple staff platform evangelicals?

17. Nov 12, 2016

### DaveC426913

18. Nov 12, 2016

### houlahound

My photons travel further than yours so the post takes longer to appear in full, I does physics.

19. Nov 12, 2016

### Averagesupernova

In my experience those who use that phrase the most are least able to actually do it, if it even is such a thing.

20. Nov 12, 2016