Why You Should Forget About Improving Your flagship research
- October 20, 2021
In our flagship study of the brain, we find that just over half of the decision-making we do is driven by sensory, instinctual, or emotional factors. Sixty percent of the time, we make decisions based on past experience, not on new information.
If you’ve ever given yourself a deadline, ever heard yourself say, “I’ll do it when I have more time,” then you’d know that sensory input drives us to make decisions.
The reason that sensory input drives us to do things is because we are all of us hardwired to be in a survival mode. When your brain is telling you to get a drink of water, you are not doing it because you have a physical need. No, you are doing it because you have a visceral need for water. It’s the same with a deadline.
This is why it is so easy to lose track of time and not know how much time you have left to get things done. When you dont have a clear idea of the amount of time you need to do something, you often get caught up in your own “I have a deadline” mentality and forget to take action. The same thing happens to us when we lose track of time.
This is where research can get really interesting. There is a lot of research that is done for a specific reason, but there is a tendency to believe that you’re just the person with the most information on a subject when really, you are the person who actually researches information.
If you don’t know your stuff, you’ll just end up wasting your time. Research is not only about finding the most reliable information, but also about verifying that information and understanding how it could help you achieve a specific goal.
One of the basic research habits I’ve observed among people is that they tend to assume that they know everything about a topic. This is not because they actually know everything, it is because they rely on things that they know and assume that everyone else knows what they think they know. This is a common problem I’ve seen, and a common one that I see among scientists when I visit the field. I’ve seen this happen to scientists in high-profile cases where there are many competing theories.
But there are some scientists whose research findings tend to be better verified when they have a more-or-less-public platform that they can use to publish their findings. To an extent, this is one of the reasons I like to use the word “research” to describe the sorts of results that I see in the field, because it implies that the results are not simply an artifact of a person or group of people with access to a certain amount of information.
It’s not just the results, it’s also the process. In science, the scientific method is a framework for hypothesis testing and validation. You can use this framework to test your hypothesis for instance. In the case of the case of the Visionaries, their hypothesis was that they would be the best of the best if they could only have one day a year to do their fun. That hypothesis is tested by testing their ability to create a day, a day in which they can do their best.
The Visionaries are not all that smart. They are a bunch of party-loving idiots who have been given an impossible choice. They can either accept the task or be the best of the best, but they have no idea how to do it, so they simply accept the task and make it happen. If that’s the case, we’re just waiting for the first day when they have a day in which they can be the best of the best.