Dimitri Glazkov

Touching infinityseven days beforeAs we explore the process of understanding, it may not be immediately…Framing

· 5 min read

Solved, solvable, unsolvable2022I have been noodling on a decision-making framework, and I am hoping…Touching infinity2022As we explore the process of understanding, it may not be immediately…When encountering an infinity-problem, we may have enough wherewithal to resist the urge to act on our caveman firmware. In such cases, we tend to employ a more sophisticated process to exit the “struggle” cycle. The typical name it goes by is framing, or discerning a subset of the infinity-problem that is approximately the same, but does not touch infinity. Framing is a bit of a cop out, a giving-up of sorts. It’s an admission that understanding infinity remains elusive. Framing is our way to convert a problem from the one we cannot solve to the one we can.

Limits2022The third limit is obvious and I am surprised I haven’t noticed…We perform this conversion by constraining the original problem. One very common technique for adding constraints is imposing a terminating condition. If we examine our instinctive “fight” response, we can spot a terminating condition: elimination of one of the participants. When we choose to fight, we convert a likely infinity-problem into a problem of winning. Shifting to this constrained problem still requires a bout of adversarial reciprocal adaptation, but only enough to reach the terminating condition.

Change2022So far, I carefully avoided the topic of change, presenting my problem-solving…Another way we constraint is by removing change from parts of the problem. Assuming things being constant feels so natural to us that we don’t even recognize it as the process of imposing constraints. Terminating conditions and removing change interlink with each other: of course the problem will go away permanently as soon as we win.

Limits of applying AI2023I’ve been thinking about the boundaries of what’s possible when applying large…Yet another way to constrain infinity-problems is by drawing bounds. It just feels right when we put limits into what is possible and what is not. Yes, it is possible that I will get hit by an asteroid right now, but it is so unlikely that I would prefer not to consider that. Yes, it is possible that a deadly virus will cause a global pandemic, but it is so unlikely … waaaaait a minute. Human-erected bounds are all around us, and again, they combine with terminating conditions and presuming lack of change to create an environment that feels predictable. Games are a great illustration of such environments. From chess to Minecraft, games create spaces where the contact with infinity is microdosed to actually become fun.

Communicating strategy as constraints2021A click up from a plan is communicating strategy as constraints. When…Enumerating constraints2021The process of inferring a set of constraints with which to communicate…

Settled and “not settled yet” framings2021I was working on decision-making frameworks this week and had a pretty…When we frame a problem by imposition of constraints, we make a choice. We choose to ignore the parts of the problem that lie outside of the constraints. Once framed, these parts become the dark matter of the problem. Whether we want them or not, they continue to exist. Their existence manifests through a phenomenon we call “side effects.” By definition, every framing will have them. Some framings have more side effects, and others less. For example, if you and I are in a high-stakes meeting, and you say something that I disagree with, I might instinctively choose the “fight” framing and attempt to engage in fisticuffs right there and then. Conversely, I might choose to invest a few extra moments to consider the infinity-problem I am facing, and instead decide to examine how your statements might enrich my understanding of the situation. It’s pretty clear from these two contrasting approaches that one framing will have more negative side effects than the other (it’s the first one, if you’re still wondering). We often use the word “reframing” as the name for this seeking of a more effective framing.

Model compression2022

Lenses, framings, and models2022At a meeting this week, I realized that I use the terms…Life of a solution2022Looking at the framework in the previous piece, I am noticing that…So it seems that we’re better off when we view framing as a deliberate process. In relation to the process of understanding, it’s a meta-process: framing defines how we proceed with our understanding. Framings are squishy and vague early on, and solidify rapidly as the process goes on. By the time we reach the “solving” stage, framings serve as foundations we build our understanding upon. To emphasize this meta-ness of framing, I will further complicate our process diagram and embed a fractal copy of it (yay, infinity!) somewhere between the “struggle” and “solve” cycles. In this way, we perceive framing as its own process of understanding, with its own “novel”, “diverge”, “converge”, and “routine” phases. And yes, I will blissfully ignore the notion of this meta-process also having its own meta-process for now. (Pop quiz: which constraining technique did I apply just now?) However, Anne Starr and Bill Torbert have an insightful exploration of that particular rabbit hole in Timely and Transforming Leadership Inquiry and Action: Toward Triple-loop Awareness, connecting awareness of this fractality of meta-processes with – what else? – Adult Development Theory. The main distinction from the larger process is that for the framing process, solution effectiveness measures the degree of side effects of the framing.

The Upper Limit Of Understanding2019An important insight hides in those last three words: “world around me”.…Mental models2022I use the term “mental models” a lot, and so I figured…Pace layers of predictability2023One thing that stood out to me was this notion of a…Fear of the abyss2019I’ve been thinking about how I experience the fear of the unknown…The problem understanding frameworkthe same dayWith my apologies for taking a scenic route and sincere thanks for…Builder and Gardener Mindsetslinks here, 2022Briefly, the distinction emphasizes the difference in mindsets with which we approach…The cycle of not-learninglinks here, 2022A repeating presence of the “how did this happen?” question is a…Models and structured reasoninglinks here, 2023The key to navigating an unsolvable problem is in investing a bit…Recognizing when framing is happening and consciously shifting to this separate framing process is likely one of the most important skills one can develop. We come in contact with infinity every day. Every heated exchange with a loved one, every swing of the unseen polarity, every iron triangle (like the project management one) is us becoming aware of the infinity’s touch. A picture that comes to mind is that of a three-layered world, where the top is filled with the routine of compressed models we take entirely for granted, supported by the middle layer of framings that we’re still puzzling out. At the bottom of this world are the Lovecraftian horrors of infinity that churn endlessly, occasionally shaking the foundation of our process of understanding and waking us up to the possibility that every framing is just a story we tell ourselves to avoid staring into the infinity’s abyss. Those capable of diving into that abyss and enduring it long enough to gain a glimpse of a new framing are the ones who enable others to build worlds upon it.

Show 1 comment
  1. Models and structured reasoning – Dimitri Glazkov linked here · June 15, 2023

    […] inside of the problem that make it impossible to solve once and for all. I call this process “framing the problem”. A successful framing produces one or more solvable problems that when solved, help us navigate […]