Pathology of QaA: problematic answers to single-mode questions

Functional Complementarity of Higher Order Questions: psycho-social sustainability modelled by coordinated movement (Part #10)

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All | PDF] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx ]

---

Through many publications, Edward de Bono has focused, notably in corporate strategic environments, on the challenge of transcending thinking traps with more appropriate and challenging questions. He has even recommended the use (in English) of a new operator "po" as a means of transcending "yes and no" mentality (Edward de Bono. PO: beyond YES and NO. London, 1972; see discussion in Categorical Straightjackets PO: A suggestion for a de-patterning device for international organization descriptions, 1974).

Elsewhere de Bono has explored the use of sets of cognitive "hats" and "shoes" (Six Thinking Hats, 1987 and Six Action Shoes, 1991). The "shoes" are notably in relation to his understanding of operacy -- which would be a key to the operation of any cognitive helicopter. As he puts it: "Most executives, many scientists, and almost all business school graduates believe that if you analyze data, this will give you new ideas. Unfortunately, this belief is totally wrong. The mind can only see what it is prepared to see."

The "pathology" of a mono-modal thinking approach might be understood in terms of so-called "freaks":

• Control freaks
• Faith freaks (fundamentalists)
• Observation freaks (trainspotters, "twitchers")
• Action freaks ("action man")
• Being freaks ("hanging out")
• Establishment freaks (status)
• Change freaks
• Transformation freaks (self-improvment)
• Significance freaks
• Knowledge freaks
• Fact freaks ("trivial pursuit")