(An element of the Genius Program, not intended for mental sloths)

I go to the supermarket and since the shopping list is quite long today, I decide to take a cart instead of a basket. There are too many purchases, everything won’t fit in the basket, and it will be hard to carry. So, I take a cart and with it I start going around the shelves, racks and counters, choosing the goods I need. Very soon I notice that I did not take the cart very well, it is slightly damaged. I push it straight, but it “tends” to turn somewhere to the left. I need to go right, but it’s going straight. And finally, when I want to turn left, for some reason she turns 180 degrees and wants to send me back to where I just came from.

What kind of mysticism?!

After a moment’s thought, I realize that the reason for the cart’s strange stubbornness is that its left rear wheel rotates with more force than all the other wheels. Either the axle is rusty, or it is curved, or the wheel is rubbing against its frame, but the fact is obvious. Because of this deceleration, the cart “turns left” all the time.

I did not write this long preface to discuss or condemn the bad ones.maintenance of trolleys by supermarket employees. It’s about something completely different.

About our thinking.

When I read a book, I kind of trust its author by obediently following him. He guides me through the pages of his book, and I, like a well-oiled and fully functional cart, go wherever the author directs me, my thinking. This is especially evident when reading textbooks and, in general, serious books that explain something to me. That is, there is a kind of “imposition” of a certain way of thinking, the one that the author of the text is striving for, willingly or unwittingly (i.e., perhaps without realizing it himself).

A capable reader, student, or student is the one just mentioned, a serviceable and well–oiled cart. She easily and obediently follows all the light movements of the author’s “hand”. When the author needs it, he drives straight, turns right or left, when the author wants it, stops, rolls back… All this is done without much effort, and the thought of the reader (student, student, etc.) follows the thought of the author and successfully reaches the desired goal.

Desired by the author!

A stupid, lazy, inquisitive reader could be likened to a cart with all the wheels turning with great difficulty. And it takes a lot of effort to follow the author’s thought along the right path. Sometimes, despite all efforts, the cart does not move, does not turn quickly enough and bumps into some shelf, instead of following the corridor between them. The situation with these two extreme cases, analogies, is clear.

But, here’s what to do if not all the wheels, but only one turns slightly slowing down? There are different possible explanations.

One, and the simplest, reader is dumb in some area, and when it comes to a subject on this particular topic, his thinking begins to slow down.

But there may be another interpretation: the reader has developed critical thinking, and it does not unconditionally accept ALL the moves, movements and turns of the author’s thought. The reader feels some kind of mental discomfort, something in his mind begins to “creak”, slow down, turn with effort. An intelligent reader, already familiar with this feeling, stops and begins to look for the cause of this mental “creaking.” An inexperienced student will either learn this purely mechanically, or completely incorrectly, or, more often than not, will ignore this passage. But, most importantly, it will continue to move in the hope of “driving out” onto a flat, smooth surface, where all the wheels will turn smoothly and without interference again. Since the search for which wheel of his consciousness is “messing up” and why it doesn’t turn like everyone else, this search sometimes requires a lot of effort, rereading the text several times, long thought, and not many people have enough patience and curiosity for this.

If the author is an intelligent and talented person, then, wittingly or unwittingly, he makes it difficult to find the reason for not turning the mental wheel. After all, he, too, in his mind, is the FIRST to push a certain cart of a logical process, and in his “journey” all wheels must rotate without difficulty and unauthorized turning to the side!

And more. The above-mentioned simple analogy provides an explanation for such a strange, but often occurring phenomenon: often capable students who shone during their studies with understanding and “good assimilation of material” later turn out to be very mediocre researchers, scientists or ordinary engineers. Where did their talent, which they so successfully demonstrated during their apprenticeship, go?! But he didn’t go anywhere, he was and remained – an obedient schoolboy, a well-oiled mental cart that never had a single wheel “stuck”! They were easy to control, their consciousness obediently rolled where the AUTHOR’s word directed them. But they themselves never tried to “turn aside.” These are the very “idols of thought” described by Francis Bacon. The obedient, easily guided mindset of an eternal schoolboy!

Thus, one of the rulesof the Genius Program sounds like this:

Read the smart text carefully, but be on your guard! Don’t let your mind give in to the flow of thought, even of a genius who will take you “where you need to go.” “Verify the harmony of algebra” by the author’s thoughts. And if you feel, even a little, even a little bit, that something in your mind is “scratching”, “creaking”, “slowing down”, don’t be lazy, stop, think about it, reread the “scratching” place several times until you understand what exactly causes this strange feeling in your mind. Then – look for your solution or explanation!

Educational example: The wonderful book by the brilliant thinker Stanislav Lem “The Sum of Technology”, chapter 7, “The Creation of worlds”, paragraph “Growing information”. In my opinion, the chapter is very difficult (especially this paragraph) and requires slow and meticulous reading-rereading with mandatory reflection. Just like this whole book, it is not easy to understand and perceive. In the mentioned paragraph, Lem discusses the ways of cognition and compares its various methods used by humans. Then he suggests a completely unusual method of “theory cultivation.” In this paragraph, Lem admits, in my opinion, several inaccuracies that he may not have noticed himself, carried away by his extraordinary, truly fantastic, but logically sound idea.

Reader, try to find these inaccuracies and indicate what they are.

19 XI 2007

P.S. This is an old, long-published note, which I repeat for new readers. Don’t blame me!