There are times when all you need to do is synthesis of established knowledge that’s distributed among people who don’t talk with each other. I think my latest post on hyaluranonfall into that category. I think there’s value in getting research together to build a gears model and adding new labels. There’s no new fundamental insight in it. That’s different for other work I’m doing that’s actually about persuing insights.
It might very well be that the key problem you want to solve in amendable to just synthesizing existing knowledge of other people. It might also be that it actually requires new fundamental insights. I don’t know in which category it falls. You probably don’t know either but have understanding of the problems you are dealing with so that you can make that judgement better than I can.
You can learn a lot from other people when you talk with them but you also get their blindspots and conventions from doing so. A lot of startup founders are quite young with relatively little knowledge of how the industries that they want to disrupt work. They have naive ideas and some of those naive ideas that established industries wouldn’t try turn out to be correct while most startups fail.
When it comes to finding new fundamental insights, you are looking for ideas that are true and that people haven’t already found in a similar way to a startup that succeeds because they have a thesis that’s the established players didn’t already pursue.
One of Elizabeths sections is titled “Stick to projects small enough for you to comprehend them”. I think the backchaining approach gives you problems the are too big to comprehend them. If you pick problems small enough to comprehend them that are exposed to feedback from reality you can learn new things about reality. Some of them are minor but if you are lucky there’s a major fundamental insight among them.
If I were in your situation one possible project I would pursue might be “What happens when I apply my ideas about agents to internal family system style agents inside myself and when I use them to speak/coach with other people their internal family system.
There are times when all you need to do is synthesis of established knowledge that’s distributed among people who don’t talk with each other. I think my latest post on hyaluranon fall into that category. I think there’s value in getting research together to build a gears model and adding new labels. There’s no new fundamental insight in it. That’s different for other work I’m doing that’s actually about persuing insights.
It might very well be that the key problem you want to solve in amendable to just synthesizing existing knowledge of other people. It might also be that it actually requires new fundamental insights. I don’t know in which category it falls. You probably don’t know either but have understanding of the problems you are dealing with so that you can make that judgement better than I can.
You can learn a lot from other people when you talk with them but you also get their blindspots and conventions from doing so. A lot of startup founders are quite young with relatively little knowledge of how the industries that they want to disrupt work. They have naive ideas and some of those naive ideas that established industries wouldn’t try turn out to be correct while most startups fail.
When it comes to finding new fundamental insights, you are looking for ideas that are true and that people haven’t already found in a similar way to a startup that succeeds because they have a thesis that’s the established players didn’t already pursue.
One of Elizabeths sections is titled “Stick to projects small enough for you to comprehend them”. I think the backchaining approach gives you problems the are too big to comprehend them. If you pick problems small enough to comprehend them that are exposed to feedback from reality you can learn new things about reality. Some of them are minor but if you are lucky there’s a major fundamental insight among them.
If I were in your situation one possible project I would pursue might be “What happens when I apply my ideas about agents to internal family system style agents inside myself and when I use them to speak/coach with other people their internal family system.