On what and how
Some people are approaching a limited set of problems (N)
in an indefinite amount (∞) of ways, continuously
fabricating a new angle. Although their changing anwers might look
unreliable, witnessing their obsession is gratifying. Gradually they
get closer to the essence of their inquiry.
On the contrary, some people are dealing with ever changing
circumstances in the same way over and over again (they have
developed a mannerism; "never change a winning team").
There are people who do something else, in a different way, all the
time. They are hard to pinpoint, and their moves might occasionally
seem random or at least inconsistent. Depending on
their outward manifestation we would label them inconfident, easily
distracted, etc. Most optimistically however, they could be eligible
for being a homo universalis.
Finally, and rather unfortunately, there are people who are pulled
towards one recurring problem, and respond equally predictably. This
lack stands out the most in a crowd though.
| N → ∞ | ∞ → N |
|---|---|
| ∞ → ∞ | N → N |
Related
[[901|The most sustainable quest is the one for the non-existing As we withdrew ourselves from the endless struggle for the New and the Different, a deeper underlying problem was exposed. Namely, the question of how to recognize, or even establish, Relevance. It was clear though, that we weren't going to find it by turning to the opposites Old and the Same. | New | Old | | --- | --- | | Not New (used, second hand) | Not Old (recent, up-to-date) | | Different | Same | | --- | --- | | Not Different (insisting, sceptical) | Not the Same (conflicting, inconsistent) | td {width:340px;height:160px;text-align:center;padding:20px; font-style:italic;} .linebottom {border-bottom:2px solid black;} .lineright{border-right:2px solid black;}-->]]