Dahlen comments on Open Thread, May 4 - May 10, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (215)
I noticed a thing that I do. When I rush; I have a tendency to do clumsier versions of actions I know really well. I have now trained myself to notice moments of rush, and purposefully "slow down to normal speed" on tasks to allow them to happen in the efficient most possible time.
Simple example, searching for a key in a bundle. Where rushing causes fumbling which takes longer, slowing down to "normal speed" makes the finding the right key happen sooner.
Is there a name for this process? Has anyone recorded it before? Is this a suggestion that other rationalists can practically take on to improve their "rushing to do things" process?
Second example; trying to cut food while under pressure. third example; trying to put on a shirt. fourth: (occasionally) typing passwords. 5th: trying to retrieve something from the bottom of a bag, (or otherwise pass an object through a small opening) 6th: running down stairs ... I think you get the idea.
TL;DR. Idea: notice when you "rush"; actively do things at "normal speed" to avoid mistakes because this gets things done faster.
When I'm in a rush and I'm about to do something that requires carefulness, attention, and "normal speed" as you call it, I tell myself that, if my purpose is to get done with it as quickly as possible, I should deliberately slow down, because more often than not, botching up something and then fixing it takes significantly longer than doing it right at a normal speed.
I suppose it depends on the model of risk associated:
where the whole task might be a minute; taking another minute to fix things up is a 100% time increase. Where a task that might not be rushed; something that takes an hour; an extra minute won't be as big a change. so not as bad a change? (but this is something of a different effect)