Parallel Thinking

by Edward de Bono

Parallel Thinking vs. Western Thinking

Traditional thinking is firmly based on 'judgement'.
This is the key mental activity:

• Is / Is not
  
• True / False
  
• Either / Or
  
• Right / Wrong
  
• Proven / Not proven
  

What are we judging?

We set up 'true' definitions, categories, boxes, and we judge whether something fits into a box or not. We judge which box the matter fits into. We seek to derive these boxes from experience, as Socrates sought to drive his true definitions of 'justice' etc., or we may decree these boxes, as in 'game truth' (we decide the rules of the game). We set up dichotomeies and opposites in order to force a judgement choice or to prove another party wrong. We also judge consistency, fit and the sufficiency of evidence for a statement. Why are we doing this?

We are doing it because we want to 'discover' the truth. We are interested in the truth of 'what is'. We believe that if you have the truth then all else is easy. It is a basic 'search idiom', like prospecting for gold. To help us in this search we use analysis and collect information.

New ideas are supposed to be presented by evolution, by creative individuals, or by 'opposites' process of thesis / antithesis followed by synthesis. Once presented, the ideas are battered into useful shape by criticism. Judgement always within the existing paradigm.

In parallel thinking the key idiom is 'design', not search. Instead of the harsh accept / reject operation of judgement, there is 'possibility'. We accept possibilities even if they are contradictory and mutually exclusive. We lay them down alongside each other in parallel.

---

Parallel Thinking vs Traditional Thinking

Parallel		Traditional
Thinking		Thinking

...................................................
'What can be' ..... 'What is'
Design ................ Search
Build ................... Discover
Create ................ Repeat
Constructive ..... Destructive
Action ................ Description
Possible ............. Certain
Acceptance ....... Refutation
Value ................. Righteousness
Windows ........... Categories
Flagpoles ........... Boxes
Spectrum .......... Dichotomies
Overlap ............. Discrimination
Soft edge ........... Hard edge
Reconcile ........... Reject ( contradictions )
Parallel .............. Adversarial
Laying aside ...... Gatekeeping judging
Exploration ....... Clash
Perceptions ....... Processing
Subjective .......... Objective
'to' ........................ 'is'
'Water logic' ...... 'Rock logic'
'What next' ....... 'What is'
Flow .................. Identity
Ideas ................. Information
Creative ............Description
Movement ....... Judgement
Whole ............... Part
Non-linear ...... Linear
System ............ Element
Forward ........... Backward
Change ............. Stability
Challenge ........ Defend
Wisdom .......... Cleverness
Plural ............... Single
Humility .......... Arrogance

---

The Failure of Western Thinking
1. Western thinking has failed because it is suitable only for certain purposes and totally inadequate for other purposes.

The Socratic method was designed for a very specific purpose - to find the one truth. Following the subjectivity of the Sophists, some whom believed that personal perceptual truths were the only truths, Socrates set out to 'discover' the 'true definitions' of such things as 'justice'. He was concerned with putting ethics onto a firm basis so that the persuasive skills of the Sophists could no longer sway society. Plato, with his strong fascist tendencies, developed the notion of 'ideal forms' which was imposed on the world by this thinking. Later Aristotle ( the third member of the 'Gang of Three' ) tightened up the system and showed its application to science. Throughout the ages, this 'discovery-of-the-truth' idiom has been very attractive to philosophers, to religious thinkers and to scientists because it has been the basis of their employment.

But this idiom is totally inadequate when there is a need to construct, to build, to change and to design a way forward. You can discover gold, but you have to design and build a house. Applying standards is no use if there is a need to develop new ideas. Where problems cannot be solved by identifying and removing the cause, there is a need to 'design a way forward'.


2. Western thinking has failed because it is actually dangerous and forces us to look at the world in a harmful way.

From the 'search for the truth' and the harshness of the judgement system have come righteousness, arrogance and intolerance of plurality. When you have found the 'truth' you know that everyone else must be 'wrong'. Indeed you must show them they are wrong, because this is one of the fundamental ways of proving that you are right. You set up a mutually exclusive dichotomy and then prove the other side wrong.


3. Western thinking has failed because of its complacency and its ability to defend itself have made it impossible to develop different thinking methods.

Because criticism is so easy, it has become a dominating habit of even intelligent people. There is a ridiculous belief that it is enough to get rid of the 'bad things' and what will be left are good things. today's experience all over the world shows that getting rid of the bad things only results in chaos. There may no longer be any people or party to blame, but that is the only gain.

The elevation of the 'critical intelligence' to the highest level of human endeavour has probably been the single greatest mistake of Western intellectual development. Yet that is still the basis of our culture and our universities. That is danger indeed.

In times of total stability, the critical intelligence might have been necessary to prevent any change and to keep things on the agreed course. But we are so very poor at dealing with change because we still hold that dangerous belief.

Western thinking is failing because it is not designed to deal with a changing world. It is failing because it is inadequate to deal with change, because it does not offer creative, constructive and design energy. It is failing because it suggests dangerous judgements and discriminations which tend to make things worse ( as in legistrative chambers and politics ). It is failing because its complacent arrogance prevents it from seeing the extent of its failure.

---

Further thinking~
The Wrong Tackle
Order out of Chaos
Order
The Socratic Method
How the Socratic Method Worked
The Doubters
The Search
Criticism and Removing 'Untruth'
Adversaries, Argument and Debate
Parallel Thinkning
Problem-Solving
The Evolution of Ideas
The Search for the Truth
The Truth
Questions
Definitions, Boxes, Categories and Generalisations
The Value of Boxes
The Problem of 'Is'
The Tyranny of Judgement
Possibility vs Certainty
Exploration vs Judgement
Design vs Analysis
Information vs Ideas
Movement vs Judgement
Create vs Discover
Inner World vs Outer World
Alternatives
Parallels
Possibilities
Designing a Way Forward
Wisdom vs Cleverness
Dialectic vs Parallels
Actiond vs Description
Value vs Truth
Water Logic and Parallel Thinking
Overlap
Change vs Stability
New Language Devices