> This process is a lot like just writing a pro/cons list. Although plain pro/con lists are more useful than people give them credit for, I think that the crucial addition is trying to figure out different actions to take to get what you want.
Good point!
I think of this as pros and cons are reusable between goals, and it’s worth learning the general sorts of structure that pro and cons (and their generation) have. Doing this, your sense of the ‘pro con space’ and how it connects to your longer term goals will improve. You’ll find yourself making more modular choices such that overall there is less wasted motion when it turns out you need to modify your sense of the goal or method. In the pedagogy literature, a lot of this falls under the heading of ‘multifinal goals and means.’ This also suggests a complementary practice of method factoring.
> This process is a lot like just writing a pro/cons list. Although plain pro/con lists are more useful than people give them credit for, I think that the crucial addition is trying to figure out different actions to take to get what you want.
Good point!
I think of this as pros and cons are reusable between goals, and it’s worth learning the general sorts of structure that pro and cons (and their generation) have. Doing this, your sense of the ‘pro con space’ and how it connects to your longer term goals will improve. You’ll find yourself making more modular choices such that overall there is less wasted motion when it turns out you need to modify your sense of the goal or method. In the pedagogy literature, a lot of this falls under the heading of ‘multifinal goals and means.’ This also suggests a complementary practice of method factoring.