Intuitively, that seems correct, and I’ve relied on the expression “when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” This got me thinking: is it necessarily the wrong way, or is this a truism?
If I have a legitimately useful and powerful tool, isn’t it indeed valuable to look around for problems that it can help solve? E.g., if we have discovered a way to harness electricity, shouldn’t think about the ways it can be used to improve communication, build labor-saving devices, power factories, etc? If we have something that has demonstrated potential to generate reliable information (supposing that forecasting could do this) shouldn’t we look for fruitful opportunities to apply it?
With a set of tools and a set of problems, why is it more useful for one side to do the searching than the other? (Sorry, maybe this is getting too meta and belongs in its own shortform?)
Actually, the set of things you want to apply electricity to is far smaller than the set of things you dont want to. For example, if your baby is crying, please dont use electricity.
The problem side should do the searching since they have the shape and exact know-how of the problem
They do and it’s a powerful point. But on the other hand they may be very much unaware of the nature of available tools and solutions. So I think there should probably be some searching — and listening — in both directions. If it’s done in good faith.
The recent forecasting is overrated post got me thinking:
Intuitively, that seems correct, and I’ve relied on the expression “when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” This got me thinking: is it necessarily the wrong way, or is this a truism?
If I have a legitimately useful and powerful tool, isn’t it indeed valuable to look around for problems that it can help solve? E.g., if we have discovered a way to harness electricity, shouldn’t think about the ways it can be used to improve communication, build labor-saving devices, power factories, etc? If we have something that has demonstrated potential to generate reliable information (supposing that forecasting could do this) shouldn’t we look for fruitful opportunities to apply it?
With a set of tools and a set of problems, why is it more useful for one side to do the searching than the other? (Sorry, maybe this is getting too meta and belongs in its own shortform?)
Actually, the set of things you want to apply electricity to is far smaller than the set of things you dont want to. For example, if your baby is crying, please dont use electricity.
The problem side should do the searching since they have the shape and exact know-how of the problem
They do and it’s a powerful point. But on the other hand they may be very much unaware of the nature of available tools and solutions. So I think there should probably be some searching — and listening — in both directions. If it’s done in good faith.