​Last week, I wrote about the way we can distill difficult, complex problems and concepts when we have a deep understanding of them. When we understand something deeply, we can strip away the detail and find a simple form that reveals the underlying principle. The simplicity comes from understanding the complexity beneath it. That raises a practical question: how do we learn to do this?

I've spent a lot of time with people who have struggled with addiction for years. Many have been to treatment more than once, attended meetings, read books, listened to talks, and learned the vocabulary of recovery. They know about black-and-white thinking. They know about future tripping. They know that resentment can become dangerous, that isolation can make things worse, and that we can talk ourselves into almost anything. These phrases are useful because they distill complicated ideas about how our minds and behavior work into something simple enough to remember.

But knowing the phrase isn't the same as understanding the thing. We can explain black-and-white thinking and still be unable to see it in our own lives. We can understand future tripping and still spend an afternoon living inside a catastrophe that hasn't happened. We can learn the language of an idea without internalizing the experience behind it. What was a distillation for the person who developed the insight becomes a simplification for the person who receives it.

Fractal Understanding

Gaining that deeper understanding requires participation. We can read about how something works, watch someone else solve a problem, or listen to someone explain what they have learned, but we have to engage with the thing ourselves to develop experience. Experience gives us feedback: we make a choice and see what happens, try something and discover that our expectations were wrong, encounter the same problem again and notice something we missed the first time. And experience compounds. Each experience changes what we are capable of seeing in the next one. The first time we encounter something, we may see only its broad outlines; as we engage with it again and again, we notice distinctions, relationships, patterns, and exceptions that weren't visible before. Those new observations allow us to engage at greater depth, which reveals more. It becomes fractal: the more closely we look, the more there is to see, and the more we see, the more deeply we can engage. We don't simply accumulate experience; we experience differently.

Frameworks

This is how we begin to develop frameworks—not simply rules for what to do, but ways of seeing. We develop an understanding of how things tend to work, what usually matters, and what tends to be noise. We may begin to recognize when we are trying to control something that isn't ours to control, when our certainty about what someone else thinks is serving an emotional need, or when we are responding to the story we have constructed about an event rather than to what actually happened. These frameworks are not fixed, and they are not singular. We develop them through experience and learn them from other people, then test them against what we encounter and revise them when they don't fit. Being wrong is useful if we investigate the wrongness: what did we expect, what happened instead, and what did we fail to see? That is hard when the framework is part of our identity. Discovering that the story we have been telling ourselves is wrong can feel like discovering something is wrong with us. Learning to tolerate that discomfort and become curious about what we misunderstood is one of the most important shifts I've made in my own life.

Our frameworks help us see, but they also determine what we don't see. Once we have a way of understanding ourselves or the world, we tend to notice the things that fit it and overlook the things that don't. A person who sees themselves as someone who always has to be in control may notice every situation that requires them to take charge while missing the ways their need for control creates problems. Someone who believes they are difficult to love may interpret another person's frustration as confirmation rather than seeing the many other things that might be happening. The framework is doing its job—it is making sense of the world—but it can also become a filter that keeps us from seeing what doesn't fit the story.

A Different View of Imagination

This is where imagination becomes important. We often think of imagination as creativity: painting a picture, writing a story, inventing something new, or having a “Eureka” moment when an unexpected insight arrives. Those are forms of imagination, but I think a different definition is more useful here. Imagination is a form of mental flexibility—the ability to loosen our grip on the way we currently understand something and entertain the possibility that we could see it differently. We can practice moving between perspectives, making connections, visualizing possibilities, and transforming an idea to see what emerges. Seen this way, imagination is less a flash of insight than a practice. It is a muscle we strengthen by learning to step outside our first interpretation.

But having more ways to see something doesn't tell us which way to see it– and no perspective captures the whole of reality anyway. We must hold enough confidence in a particular way of seeing to gain insight, while at the same time being open to the possibility that it is incomplete or wrong. We choose a way of understanding, act from it, and pay attention to what happens next. Then, we notice when reality pushes back against our understanding and are willing to change course. It is not the absence of uncertainty. It is moving forward while staying open to being wrong.

Simplification and Distillation

This brings us back to the person in recovery who knows all the language. Knowing about black-and-white thinking is not the same as seeing it in ourselves. Knowing about future tripping is not the same as recognizing that we have left the present and entered a story about the future. The words can be learned in an afternoon. The understanding behind them may take years. We have to encounter these patterns in our own lives, notice them, get them wrong, examine what we missed, and develop a way of seeing that becomes part of us.

That may be the difference between simplification and distillation. Simplification gives us the short version. Distillation comes from understanding what is underneath it. We cannot shortcut our way to the latter by memorizing someone else's conclusions. We have to participate, develop experience, build and revise our ways of seeing, and become willing to look differently when those ways stop working.

The irony is that deep understanding can eventually make something look simple. When we have done the work, we may be able to express a complicated idea in a few words. The person hearing those words may mistake their simplicity for understanding. The simple phrase is not the understanding. It is what remains after the understanding has been earned.

Love,

Doc

Forwarded this email? Sign-up here​

See past posts here.

​Unsubscribe · Preferences​