Hard Problems

Long time since posting.

Sometimes we get caught up in a binary decision making process on controversial issues.  When a controversial, seemingly intractable problem arises, often two options for response are presented:

- Do something major.  There's a huge problem that requires a major change for a solution.  I'm concerned that the problem is large.  I think benefits of change far outweigh the negatives.
- Do nothing.  Even if there is a problem, there's nothing that can be done about it.  I'm concerned that the solution is worse than the problem.  Change is a slippery slope.

It doesn't help that when these type issues arise we often reflexively defend our pre-existing beliefs without thinking fully about the proper response.  For most of us, it's likely important to ask ourselves "Am I trying to prove myself right, or am I trying to get at the underlying truth?"  This is important to do, as it's natural to interpret information in ways that leaves our preconceived notions unchallenged.

Charlie Munger notes it's insightful that we should invert a hard problem to better understand it, so instead maybe before becoming entrenched  we should try a couple thought experiments.

Advocates for change might ask:  "What negative outcomes might we create in our efforts to address this problem?"  In this line of questioning, we might anticipate negative unintended consequences and might find that the cure is worse than the disease and proceed more cautiously.  The goal here is to make sure we don't advocate for change that ultimately creates another larger problem down the road.  In this context it's likely we'll better understand the opposing viewpoint.

or

Opponents to change might ask:  "Instead of trying to improve the problem, is there anything we can do to make this problem worse?"   In this line of thought, even though we oppose any change, we might see that there are in fact levers we might pull to influence the range of outcomes.  To say that "nothing can be done" might be inaccurate.  We might find that we're simply unwilling to consider those options.  But if we are unable to think of ways to make a problem worse, then a problem may truly be beyond our ability to influence.

And finally both opponents and advocates should recognize that doing nothing is also a decision.  Doing nothing is the same as saying the current status quo is the best solution we can arrive at.

There's a human tendency to make the accurate statement "We'll never completely solve this problem."  But we should recognize that statement as a completely different conclusion than saying:  "We can't improve this problem."