Time Granularity, part 2
Further meta-thoughts about past, present, and future
In part 1, I considered how our effectiveness varies with the size of time interval. For intervals that are too long or too short, there’s nothing that we can do. So, we need to operate with some awareness of what’s “just right,” a long-enough but not-too-long interval of interest. In this part 2, I consider some implications of focusing on this “middle ground.”
Turning points
Most of us seem to operate in a state of denial. We know that the odds are heavily against making any difference to the world over the long term. And we know that the odds are heavily against any single instant’s actions or choices making any difference at all. But we nevertheless can notice and take advantage of turning points – instants of leverage. A turning point doesn’t need to be a huge life-changing event. It just needs to be an opportunity where a choice is available and we pick the right one.
Often these turning points are only clear in retrospect. My favorite example is when I met my future wife at breakfast in college. Nothing much happened as a direct consequence of that meeting – she was there with her boyfriend of the time, and there were no sudden sparks or falling in love at first sight. It was not at all obvious at the time that she would go on to be the largest influence on the rest of my life. But looking back, I can clearly see the significance of that encounter.
On an ongoing basis, we have those moments of leverage at the point where we choose our activity, or choose our response to an event. An interesting question is whether it’s good or bad to be conscious of those choices and choice points. An initial response might be that consciousness is preferable: we should be aware that the choices are happening, and we should be conscious of the choice we make.
However, the evidence seems to suggest that our conscious mind doesn’t necessarily have the speed or capacity to get involved in everything, and is unhelpful for certain kinds of task. One indicator of expertise is that the right thing happens without conscious thought.
Thus, educational theorists talk about a four-stage model of competence, combining conscious/unconscious on one side with competent/incompetent on the other side. Then the transitions of interest are:
from unconscious incompetence to conscious incompetence, then
from conscious incompetence to conscious competence, and finally
from conscious competence to unconscious competence.
That general framework applies to any skill; but it is particularly interesting to consider its implications for the meta-level skill of time management or attention allocation.
The unconsciously incompetent are unaware of the choices that they are making, and/or they are unaware of the means by which they respond to those choices. At the opposite end, the unconsciously competent make good choices without necessarily being aware that they are doing so.
Future culture
We start (as individuals, and presumably as cultures/tribes) with an animal’s perspective on time: the world is exactly as it is (i.e. as we perceive it in the moment) and our choices are only the immediate choices of now. Between experience, language, and culture, we learn that there is a past. We may even learn that there are multiple competing pasts and there are disputes or disagreements about the past. That introduces some level of tension between perceiving what is and perceiving what ought to be. It may also lead to experiencing what is in terms of what should happen next. Between language and culture, we learn that there are possibilities.
We don’t individually have the possibility of immortality, but we can extend our significance in space and/or time beyond our own lifetime. We can make a rough measure of this impact by considering the number of people affected and the length of time of the effect. If we perceive that our actions produce a larger value for this measure, that’s motivating. The larger the increase of this measure, the greater the motivation. Some similar calculation seems to be how entrepreneurs think about their envisioned products/companies.
Our contributions are insignificant except insofar as they enable or support future culture. We can plan – perhaps only as far ahead as the next 5 minutes, perhaps the next meal, but perhaps envisioning years or centuries ahead. It’s mostly a good thing to be able to plan and consider choices, but it does run the risk that we can become confused about the difference between possibilities and necessities, or that we can be so focused on the future that we don’t accurately perceive the present.
Being present
It’s easy to be in a situation where we are so worried about going somewhere, or meeting a schedule or deadline, that it’s essentially impossible to really notice where we are or what we’re doing in the current moment.
We don’t really want to lose the capability to know the past – or multiple alternative pasts. And we don’t really want to lose the capability to envision the future – or multiple possible futures. But we want those capabilities to be servants, not masters.
Apparently need to pass through the stages of being enthralled by the past and future to re-develop a more present-oriented perspective. One tool that can be helpful is meditation.
We can be informed by the past and future, but we don’t spend time there. Or to put it another way, we can allow our imagination and our attention to travel to the past and the future when that’s advantageous – but our body can never spend any time anywhere except the present and the immediate next moment. “No matter where you go, there you are.”