The Challenge of the Blank Sheet of Paper

A clean sheet of paper.

The open road. A new programming language

All examples of limitless possibilities. And where decisions can’t be made because alternatives are not refined.

Here even values don’t help because the is simultaneously everything to choose from but nothing to do.

Create a plan?  Doodle and wait for direction from within or without?

The first principle of Deciding Better is to decide to decide. We’re making decisions all the time, whether we are aware of the choices or not. In order to decide better, its critical to begin to be conscious about decisions. And we know that decisions can only be made in the present. A choice is an action and actions by definition are events in the “now”. You can’t do anything in the past or the future and, by extension it’s impossible to make decide to do something in the future. It’s impossible to change a decision made in the past as well of course.

The blank sheet of paper challenges this approach. How can decisions be made when there are no choices on offer? A blank sheet of paper provides no list of alternatives. Decision Theory suggests that the proper procedure is to brainstorm to create a list of all possible alternatives and then use some value weighting system to choose the best of the alternatives. Am I supposed to list all of the possible things to write? Fiction, non-fiction, lists, drawings . . .  Drawings of what? Fish, birds, building, people, microbes, maps . . .

Way too many possibilities to enumerate. More buckets that I have at my disposal.

It’s well known that too many choices can be as much of a problem as too few choices. In fact we feel most comfortable when there is no choice at all. But at least give me clear alternatives. This in part I believe is behind the flight to simplicity we see these days. As a response to excess we reject complexity all together. Just simplify my life. Make it easy for me. Clear alternatives that represent real values.

Faced with the blank sheet of paper, I believe that the right place to look is in the opposite direction. Not at the paper but into the viewer of the paper.  Look within. The blank paper, the tool on the bench or the computer language has nothing to offer except the possibility of action. It is the actor, not the tool that needs simplification.

There has to be some model that is inside us that provides the list of possible actions to take with that blank sheet of paper. This is a reduction of complexity within ourselves which in principle is no different from reducing complexity in any other domain of making decisions, creating simplified models.

Balancing Warm and Cool



Silo, originally uploaded by jjvornov.

Looking at classic color landscape (Galen Rowell, others) there is often a beautiful interplay of warm and cool. Often its the warmth of low angle sun on rock playing against the dark sky. I tend to make the mistake of waiting for warmth in the sky instead of using its coolness as a foil.

Simplicity or Poverty of Choice?

Reducing complexity is a real cultural concern in recent years. Its often cast as a positive goal: increasing simplicity- but I think that a diminutive can’t be increased. Complexity is our true target.

Similarly, that diminutive, “focus”, has become the goal achieved through “more simplicity”. From my decision analytic perspective, the problem is one of complexity leading to more difficult decisions. Why is complexity harder? Because complexity increases uncertainty. If there are two alternatives, the decision space is smaller than when there are one hundred. We use metaphor and models to reduce complexity and make decisions easier. This is the paradox of choice. More alternatives make decisions harder not easier.

Ctein:

In a shorter span of time I probably made four times many photographs, most of which will prove redundant, and editing down that set is going to take uninspiring hours of peering and comparing.

Is the answer really to reduce our decision space in reality? Is it really better to have fewer clothes or fewer browser bookmarks? Or to return home after an afternoon of image capture and realize that the potentially great image is marred by being just slightly out of focus? Wouldn’t have been better to just grab the same image 3 times, knowing that they might be identical, but that it also could be that one and one only really was successful?

I challenge the advocates of “less is more” to convince me that they doing any more than reducing the number of alternatives they have available and thus simply artificially making decisions easier.

I believe it is possible to do better by living in a rich, complex, uncertain environment full of way too many choices and lear to decide better. A world filled with only chocolate and vanilla? Ugh. Give me chocolate raspberry. Gelato, sorbet or artisan ice cream. My choice.

Reducing Complexity

I started out writing about how to make better decisions under conditions of uncertainty. At some point, I became more interested in the meaning and sources of uncertainty than the decision theory itself.

First, I explored the background concepts of probability and the unpredictability that arises from non-linear or discontinous processes, the provence of chaos theory. The problem is that while the world is not predictable as one might expect from a clockwork universe, its also not without regularity. These patterns are what we use to make best guesses when the future is uncertain, complexity.

But what’s most interesting are emergent phenomenon, those things that arise out of their components with no real clue to the nature of the whole in the analysis of the parts. My lifelong area of study, the brain, is perhaps the greatest example of emergence- what we call mind or consciousness. How does it arise? Where does it come from?

In the end we come full circle because we can’t understand or predict these emergent phenomenon. So we rely on simplification and metaphor to make sense of the complex and mysterious. Clearly one of the functions of our mental models and computational tools is purely simplification, a creation of a simpler, more predictable universe to deal with.

Sketches



Sedum Closely Observed, originally uploaded by jjvornov.

My photographs are not carefully considered. My eye is attracted to some form or light. I frame and capture. Work the subject until I’ve made what I think will be a usable image.

Being Attacked

One of the interesting consequences of moving personal identity out beyond the confines of the brain and body is that our feelings about external objects and people becomes enmeshed with the sense of self.

When I’ve had my car broken into or, worse, had a robbery in my home, I always had a feeling of personal violation. When some one I love is feeling bad, I feel bad. When they are away or, in the case of my parents, have passed away I feel as if I lost a part of myself.

And under an assumption of extended cognition, I really have lost a part of myself because those people or things are a part of me- or at least a part of the mental model of me.

This makes creating art hard. The photograph I posted just now is a part of me. I decided to capture the image, conceptualized a look for the final image and used my skills of image manipulation to try and realize that vision. Now that its out there it is not separate from me. It actually represents me in the world. Criticize it and I will feel attacked.

The New Normal



Pattern Interrupted, originally uploaded by jjvornov.

Nikon introduced a 35mm f/1.8 prime for their cropped DX cameras. I had used my old 50mm f/1.8 when I started with the D80, but moved to the 24 mm f/2.8 as the compact, light kit. Somehow when I moved up to the bigger, heavier D300 it made more sense to put the bigger Tamron 17-55mm zoom, giving me a fuller range.

But now with the smaller D7000, a small, light prime makes sense again so I’ve added the 35mm f/1.8 DX to my kit. So far I find it sharp enough but the out of focus areas can be harsh looking. In this image I used the narrower DOF but in the end added more blur with Photoshop to get the background softer and more surpressed.

After Eggleston



Early Morning, originally uploaded by jjvornov.

When I was in Sweden for the European MS meeting, ECTRIMs, I had some time to visit the Hasselblad Center’s exhibition of William Eggleston’s recent Paris show.

From the announcement:

Eggleston’s characteristic depictions of simple, often solitary places in the American south were elevated to the level of fine art. Now, thirty years after his breakthrough at MoMA, Eggleston portrays Paris in the same austere fashion and with the same sense of pop cultural details he once found in the outskirts of Memphis

.

I was heartened looking at his images. They represent the kind of closely examined details that I’m drawn to. While I’m often capturing images in cities, my environment is this suburban landscape. And I think it deserves close observation. Eggleston’s work shows me how far I have to go in that exploration.

Extended Cognition

Wouldn’t be nice to extend your brain with technology? Improved memory,?More acute vision? The ability to see distant places without moving?

But don’t we actually do these things every day with our available technology?

The Path From Apple’s Newton to Evernote

The basic idea was really simple. We figured that no one is really fully satisfied with our normal brains, with our normal memory. Everyone wants a better brain. And a few years ago, it looked like technology was finally at a point where it would be viable to try to build a service to be your secondary brain – your external brain.

This in some sense what Andy Clark means by Extended Cognition.

We view ourselves as a mind limited within a body. Subjectively, we generally feel like we’re located behind our eyes, between our ears. This is the self perceives with the senses and controls the motor apparatus.

There are several hard questions about this sense of consciousness. What exactly is it? Where is it located? Does it really exist in a physical sense or is it just an illusion, a byproduct of a complex functioning brain? Is it unique to brains or could a computer possess it? Animals? Is it dependent on language?

In 1998, Andy Clark and David Chalmers proposed what I think turns out to be a new and useful perspective. Instead of the disembodied mind of Descarte’s dualism or the embodied mind of Lakoff’s neurobiological conception, they place the mind across both the brain and its extended environment. It had seemed to me over the last few years that there had to be some reality to the conceptual world. I think this was Plato’s intuition as well, but he didn’t have a good metaphor for understanding why, for example, mathematics is real. The embodied mind exists in a world where math works, so the metaphor of math is a useful mental model in the brain. But on reflection, it seems that these metaphors have a fuzzy boundary and aren’t purely interior. When I read and become absorbed in the text or listen to music and see the patterns of sound, I lose my sense of being located in my head. Flow, according to Csikszentmihalyi is that sense of immersion when the boundary of self dissolves.

Extending the location of consciousness, the mind, to include objects outside of the borders of the body leads to some interesting ways to look at clarifying values and making decisions. In essence, once the borders of in here and out there are made less absolute, then it becomes easier to understand how abstractions and concepts can be influential in the real world.

And it blurs the line between self and object- whether computer or notebook. Self and other people and organizations. A broader sense of identity.