The "right" cookies

I've been busy traveling for business, and I'm glad to be back with a thought for today for my Zaadz blog. :)

A conversation:

Abby: "I have two cookie recipes here."

Bob: "Ah. Good. I want to make cookies. Okay, which one is the right one?"

Abby: "The right one? What do you mean? They are both valid recipes."

Bob: "But which one is the *right* one to make cookies?"

Abby: "Er, they are both right. They both make cookies."

Bob: "Well, okay, but which one makes the *right* cookies?"

Abby: ???

Substitute exercise programs, philosophies, psychological methods, or whatever you like for "cookie recipies" in the above conversation and let your mind run the paths. Hmmm.

There are linguistic issues in the above conversation. Depending on the topic, this conversation can typically either (1) continue to have the two speakers missing each other's point of view entirely, or (2) devolve into arguing over which one is, indeed, the *right* one and why. Although the "why's" tend to run into emotional and opinion-based territory.

One way to get a bit farther up the ladder is to change the question. It isn't about which one is better, it's about which one is better for _what_?

Not which is better in general, or all the reasons that one is good and other isn't good in a myriad of situations, but specifically narrow in on the 'what' part. Defining the "what" really adds clarity to things. Some recipes are great for one kind of application, problem, or result. Other are great for different ones. Get your bearings by first asking the other person what the 'what' part is.

Abby: "Better for what?"

And as often as not, they won't know the 'what'. So have them begin there. Once they can speak the what, often the rest comes naturally. And often, you save hours of time because you didn't struggle and conflict over the "comparison without context" problem.

Put simply, don't try to work on the "how" until you know the "what".

Nameste,
--Katin