blink

so i just finished reading Blink by Malcolm Gladwell. i picked it up randomly off of my friend's bookshelf while i was in maui. i identified it as something i've been wanting to read but the ultimate test for me always comes when i read the first few pages, if it grabs me, it's on! but if not, it'll go back on the shelf. yes, i am a fickle book reader. my bad yo.

but this book did grab me, mostly because it was about psychology and human behavior and i love analysis, i find it all terribly intriguing. however the best part was that it was written in a very approachable manner, not in highfalutin' psychobabble that would have lost me at hello. i'm smart but not that smart. ha.

in any case, i identify with this book because it's about how people make decisions whether it's a snap judgement or a well-thought out processed decision. the jist is that we humans have demonstrated repeatedly (of late) that we don't trust our gut instincts enough. it seems that Gladwell's opinion is that in the end only you know whether to trust your gut or whether you need more evidence. apparently the majority of the time we're flooded with information that only clouds our efforts at judgement. it seems, at times, the less information the better. he use examples of battles during times of war comparing leaders that had vast amounts of intelligence at their disposal vs. others that didn't. the leaders that didn't were forced to trust their instincts and they were usually the ones that won the battle. of course, i'm majorly oversimplifying Gladwell's writing and doubt i'm doing it the justice it deserves but my main attraction to it is that he's calling us to action. not to just be content to sit and evaluate things given all the data that is available to us in this age of technology. to me, he's saying that we as humans are losing our instincts because we're increasingly clouded by information. it's not to say that information is bad, not at all, we just have to be able to figure out what's useful, what's not, and when enough is enough. there are scenarios when computers will repeatedly trump human intellect in frequency and accuracy and hence the beauty of modern technology but there are also a multitude of situations where only our instinct and gut will help us and generally these are the ones that require split second reactions. Gladwell uses examples of studies done on policework, randomized studies, but the most interesting of all (and also the most brilliant in it's simplicity) is one about how orchestras choose new musicians.

apparently, once upon a time, people just came and tried out for specific instruments. makes sense right? but then randomly an orchestra in Germany decided to hold blind auditions which means that the classical musicians tried out behind a screen so the only thing they could be evaluated on was pure skill. so when the maestro of this orchestra heard a particular musician play and say, this is the one, this is the one. do you think he was surprised when the musician came out behind the screen and it was...a woman? absolutely. as is the case in so many things, women were discriminated against in this particular industry. it was thought that women just couldn't play certain, more masculine, instruments properly, they just didn't have the physical capacity or whatever other reason men of the time could come up with. but here, there was irrefutable evidence that a woman could indeed play as well as a man and so eventually (and remember i'm greatly simplifying this) now 50% of orchestras audition blindly. how awesome is that? a problem was identified and instead of organizing some mass method of inquiry/study/investigation someone thought, why not just make it the industry standard to have blind auditions? because in the end, all that matters is the music right? so Gladwell's point in the end, in my opinion, was that if we could return to that kind of thought that's more...simple, simplistic, basic, elementary...many of the issues that we as a society face right now could possibly be solved. again, i recognize that many of the problems of the world are complex but just because they are complex does that mean there's no simple solution?

if i had to sum up this book briefly i'd say that he's urging us to go back to our instincts, a tool we've been equipped with probably since the beginning of time now dulled by lack of confidence in humans over machines and a deluge of information. if you know me, you'd know by now why i like this book. it has been a process but i've gradually learned to trust my gut because it has been proven to me over and over again that it's usually right. i've allowed myself to be open to and at least consider the opportunities that come my way. and luckily i can say that 95% of the time it's turned out phenomenally. listen to your instincts and you'll know when to go, stop, and/or pause. have faith and patience that the universe is not out to destroy you. half full people, half full.