90% of our anxiety in life comes from the falsification, speculation, exaggeration and subjective amplification of phenomena and emotions, not from the accurate grasp of the nature of the problem.
Editor’s note: This article is from the WeChat public account “sixth person” (ID: Connect_yourself), the author of the sixth person.
Our 90% of our anxiety comes from the falsification, speculation, exaggeration, and subjective amplification of phenomena and emotions, not from the objective analysis of the nature of the problem.
Because of this, most of our anxiety can be broken without any self-defeating—because of their appearance and the nature of the problem, it is a hundred thousand miles away.
Because of work, I slowly developed the habit of breaking the casserole and asking the end – all things, I want to make a hole like a groundhog, and score three feet.
Most of us live in phenomena and emotions. This is the biggest trap and trap in life – because we are always outside the essence of the problem.
And grasping the law is the path to solve all problems.
5 ask “why” clearly define the problem
In the process of chatting with many friends, I found a particularly pleasant exchange. We often throw problems because of some confusion, and then gradually talk about feelings and understanding. In the process, we will throw back and catch the ball back and forth on this proposition. Finally, we found out that we originally discussed A, but in the end we think that the problem The essence is actually B, not the imaginary C.
In most cases, we will have a headache and find a way to solve A, or follow C to find the answer, but in the end, we should go back to B and look for B’s answer Bx.
For example, when we discuss the middle-aged crisis, what are we talking about?
Middle-age crisis–>No way to change jobs while maintaining a high salary->No way to maintain long-term professional competitiveness->No way to gain the ability to develop rapidly in the next 5-10 years of career-> How to enter an ideal industry + platform with an acceptable range of high salaries.
The problem is here, from the initial one, just to cope with life, to win the “high-paying rice bowl”, and to become the future “to get a career speed by entering an industry track.”
Which is a superficial phenomenon, which is the essence of soul torture?
Staying at a high salary, our choice and thinking must be the ultimate answer to finding money – and for money, can we make sacrifices for health, time, and family companionship?
Fast forward to “Entering the fast-growing industry track”, IWhat we have to think about is – which high-growth industry and my skills/psychological/core advantages are closest, and the possibility of conversion and survival is highest?
The conclusions they draw are quite different. This is a very typical process of defining problems.
But usually, our brains are lazy, and our hearts are hard to bear the pain and suffering of thinking about the nature of these problems. Because thinking itself also likes to take shortcuts, it also likes to move in the most comfortable way and inertia.
In an in-house course, I learned this little trick – 5 why, to help you clearly define the boundaries of the problem.
You can continually torture yourself: Why? Why is this? After having B?
Like some of the cross-border issues I see in the community: there is almost no chance of winning, or what you want to define is how to solve this core problem of “capability matching” across the border. ? Then, what is the ultimate ability of “capability matching”? In the case of unmatched experience, when you can’t accumulate point-to-point intuition, feel, or even perform operations in a short time, what do you rely on in a new industry to survive?
What capabilities do you need for a new position? What specific tasks does this capability need to accomplish? You don’t have this post experience, how can you complete it quickly and smoothly? You can’t do it because you don’t know the method at all, or don’t know where to study, or are you not learning fast enough?
I don’t know which ability I need is not deep in research, and my position is vague.
I don’t know if the method is a path that doesn’t find a way to solve the problem, and how to make a tactical problem.
Learn not fast enough, then go back to learning efficiency and the way you learn.
The problem cannot be clearly defined, and all discussion and thinking will stay on the surface of the phenomenon – and you will again and again, and remain obsessed with staying on the surface.
5 Why? It will take you very quickly to leave the plane you are used to, and have the opportunity to open a door and walk to a black world that you didn’t expect. But only through this long tunnel, you can lead to the essence of the problem and then find the answer to the question.
Find the rules behind
I recently read a 100,000+ industry article, which is very well written and has a solid marketing knowledge and theoretical literacy.
A year ago, I might be very excited to close it up and think it is really a good article. But now, I still feel that there is still some regret in the meaning–that is, this article still stays in the description of phenomena and trends, and ultimately does not give a clear methodological and practical guidance – what to do?
The article probably means that Adidas is over-delivered on digital media, that is: they are over-emphasized