Join 📚 Christian Champ's Highlights
A batch of the best highlights from what Christian's read, .
Isn’t there a danger in creating Tim Tebows? That is, isn’t it likely that we will create strong attractors for movement solutions that work early in the learning process but will not be successful later on (and will be more difficult to change at that point)? I am not worried about this happening if we continue to move practice up the representativeness continuum and use the 70% rule as a guide. Attractors for ineffective movement solutions do not arise because we fail to step in to prescriptively correct them. Instead, they arise because we spend too much time practicing in conditions of low representativeness with a very high-performance success rate.
Learning to Be an “Ecological” Coach
Rob Gray
Recall that mental models are constructs that represent our understanding of classes of situations that are more similar than not. Deep stories, by contrast, are enactments that create sui generis mental models applying only to one significant new situation. Simple enactments can unfold on the basis of an existing mental model. Deep stories, however, would be impossible without narrative rationality. They require us to continuously improvise the background story while acting. This means constructing the mental model as the enactment unfolds (learning in the most general sense). During the construction phase, situation awareness is very poor for an extended period, and is experienced as the disorientation characteristic of early phases of learning. By contrast, the context-switching period of a normal enactment is short, and managed subconsciously. No active learning behaviors are required.
Another big advantage of simplification is that it frees up time, and time is one of your most valuable resources in the world. If you give an ant infinite time, it can move a mountain all by itself. In my case, I can run the equivalent of three separate careers (cartoonist, author, entrepreneur) in the same forty-hour week that would normally accommodate one job. Simplification frees up energy, making everything else you do just a little bit easier. That’s a huge deal. You don’t want your job interview to go poorly because on the way to the interview you completed four complicated errands that turned you into a ball of stress. When you are trying to decide between optimizing and simplifying, think of your entire day, not the handful of tasks in question. In other words, maximize your personal energy, not the number of tasks.
How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big
Scott Adams
...catch up on these, and many more highlights
Readwise