[Neurons] 2022 Neurons #17 CATEGORY THINKING

[Michael Hall]

From: L. Michael Hall

2022 Neurons #17

April 25, 2022

Distinctions #15

 

THINK IN CATEGORIES

BUT NOT CATEGORICALLY

 

When you first learned to think and to talk, you thought in terms of
categories.  Mom or dad offered you a specific item- and then categorized it
by putting it into a classification.  "This is a toy." You learned about
items that were food items.  Some things could be eaten and other things
could not.  There were some things that you could do and that were
permissible, and then there were things that were not.  As you learned about
items, you simultaneously learned about categories.  "These are play
clothes; these are school clothes."  You also learned to put activities into
certain categories.

 

To think in categories is to use a system of classification for thinking.
It enables you to sort things out.  It also prevents becoming mentally
overwhelmed.  You learned the 26 letters of the alphabet: A B C D E F G etc.
The letters are the members of the class, the classification is the
alphabet.  Most of us learned the letters by singing them until they became
a single unit.  Even today you may not know what letter comes before, say Q,
unless you back up and say the letters in before Q.  It's in this way that
we can overcome the severe limitation of conscious awareness- the 7+/-2 bit
of information at a time.

 

But thinking in categories is not the same as categorical thinking.
Categorical thinking is defined as "being without exception or
qualification, absolute."  That's a very, very different thing!  Here then
is a critical distinction, the distinction between categorical thinking and
category thinking.  To think categorically is to think in absolute and rigid
terms.   Categorical thinking has been called Aristotelian thinking because
it assumes that categories are absolute.  It confuses the map with the
territory.  "It is X, period."  End of story.  This primarily describes the
thinking of a child who has just discovered some category and does not have
the cognitive flexibility to recognize that we are the ones who do the
categorizing and that anything can be put into multiple categories.

 

I bring this up because of the importance of category thinking.  It's
essential for clear and precise thinking about the variables in a given
field.  It answers the first question of meaning which we all ask, "What is
it?"  That is, how should I categorize X?  This is also critical for being
able to work with the meta-levels in your mind.   After all, over the years
you have been building up a set of categories which now make up the frames
of your mind.  They make up a matrix of frames.  And while we have many in
common, we also-all of us-have unique and idiosyncratic categories.

 

Take something as simple as making a mistake in writing or saying something.
What category do you put that item?  Do you have a category called
"failure?"  Perhaps you put it into the category of "learning."  Maybe the
category of "human fallibility."  The category you put it in determines what
it means to you.   That's because the category is your frame.  It is your
internal mental context which you use to "make sense" of things.  And the
amazing thing about human beings-we have multiple levels of categories.

 

There is John, a person.  Categories that we all share would be as follows.
John is a "man," and "man" is in the category of "human," which is in the
category of "mammal," which is in the category of "animate being" (not
inanimate thing), which is in the category of "sentient beings," which may
be in the category of "life" or "living," etc.  These levels of
classifications or frames enable us to sort things out and have multiple
members of a class.  And because they operate as logical levels, it enables
us to think more clearly about things.

 

This is how we learn.  It describes an essential aspect of learning.  First
you learn some items in a field, then you learn the first level categories.
After that you may perhaps learn of other members of the class, as you
become familiar and knowledgeable about a category, you become ready to
learn about the meta-classification, and all of the other higher categories,
all the way up.

 

Today I was asked about how I think about and keep in mind the Well-Formed
Outcome questions and distinctions which we use in Meta-Coaching.  I said
that I think of them in terms of 6 categories (although you could set up
less or more categories).  So, for example, to set a goal you first have a
Subject, a Context, Processes, Supporting elements, a Decision, and Closure.
Then within each there are typically two to five detailing questions in each
category.  So to learn how to benchmark, a person needs to know both the
category and the kind of questions in each.

Thinking inductively: What questions would help me get the subject as a
category?  How many ways could I ask questions about the category of the
subject?

Thinking deductively: What category would X-question fall into?  It would be
a member of what classification?

 

When I start a coaching conversation, I want to know the subject.  To attain
that I could ask, "What do you want to talk about?"  But that's pretty
wimpy.  So I strengthen it, "What do you want?"  That's a bit better, it
puts the focus on the person and the object.  But I could do better.  "What
generative change do you want to make?"  "What would be the most
transformative change that would be a complete upgrade in your life?"  All
of these questions are questions about the subject.  If you are watching a
coaching session, and especially if you are benchmarking one, you have to
engage in category thinking so that you know how to think about the question
and where to put it.   "What is the category of this question?"

 

So while categorical thinking is extremely limited and more often than not,
an ineffective thinking pattern, thinking in categories is essential if you
want to be a clear and precise thinker.

 

 

 

L. Michael Hall, Ph.D.

Executive Director, Neuro-Semantics

P.O. Box 8

Clifton CO. 81520 USA

www.neurosemantics.com 

 

To subscribe or unsubscribe to Neurons, send request to meta at acsol.net 

134324 NeuroSemantics Inside Out Front Cover

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist8.pair.net/pipermail/neurons/attachments/20220424/d789fa52/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 21511 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://pairlist8.pair.net/pipermail/neurons/attachments/20220424/d789fa52/attachment-0001.jpg>