I recently developed what people around me call “ A very annoying habit.” This habit is apparently very irritating and tends to shut down conversations almost before they even start. What I am doing is educating people with some recently found information that makes my conversations more intelligent and interesting. Some point out that, in their uneducated opinion, I am being patronizing and condescending.
I recently read an article, while studying no limit Texas holdem poker, which explained how players use the “Ladder of Inference” to make bad decisions at the poker table. You see, poker is a game of incomplete information. We don’t know what other players’ cards are, what the next cards will be, how other players will act, etc. So we make decisions on observed data like betting patterns and physical reactions. We use the data to climb the rungs of a ladder that leads to an action that may be totally incorrect.
This Ladder of Inference begins with real data: the kind of data that could have been captured by a camera because it is true and visible. We then begin selecting and adding the rungs of the ladder. The first rung is added when we selectively choose portions of the actual data by projecting our own experiences onto that data. This, of course, modifies the data.
The next rung is when we affix a meaning to the selected data. We then add the assumptions rung and the conclusions rung. This last step takes us to the top of the ladder which is the actions step. We have been selective with the data and it’s meaning, added assumptions and conclusions based on our beliefs, and then acted accordingly. This whole system has its basis on our beliefs, which dictate what portion of the real data we choose to work with for our first rung. Maybe a better spelling would be WRONG instead of RUNG.
As I normally do, I want to change the ladder concept a little. This whole concept implies, we create a Ladder of Inference that we then climb to the wrong conclusion and therefore the wrong action. I think that we are not climbing the ladder UP but rather we are climbing the ladder DOWN into a pit. As we climb into this pit, we are surrounded by darkness, misinformation, and bad conclusions. When we reach the bottom, we may not be able to look up to the light of truth. It is a difficult task to climb up the ladder back to the truth.
In poker, building and climbing the ladder into the Pit of Erroneous Assumptions (PEA) will lead us to lose all our chips. We will make the bad bet, or make the bad call, or make the bad fold. At which time we build the ladder of Bad Luck and climb into the Woe Is Me PIT (WIMP) lamenting over the injustice of the poker gods.
In business and in life, we build and climb many ladders on a daily basis. We happily travel through our daily grind unaware that we are building ladders so we can climb from pit to pit. Luckily, most ladders do not get us into great trouble and are necessary to maintain sanity. After all, who can build correct ladders at all times.
So… I have taken it upon myself to try making good decisions in poker and life (mostly in poker however). So I have become even more irritating to all around me when I say” I am not climbing that ladder today”. I have to explain what I mean, and people seem offended by the explanation, or am I climbing a ladder here?
Well, what do we need to do? We need to be aware of the ladders we build and the consequences of the inferences we make each day. We need to try to ensure that we are close to the actual truth and facts when we make the first rung of the ladder – the selection of data – and carefully build ladders that take us as close to the appropriate and correct actions as possible. This way we can win more often in poker, business, and life. And, maybe, avoid being in the WIMP.
I am about to again risk the ire of most, if not all, who read this. You see, I am about to embark on a short lesson in the English language. This should be of interest to all who aspire to correctly use English in business and their daily lives. I have been noticing on the various listservs, emails, websites and other correspondence, that people are apparently unfamiliar with some common usage of words. These errors are manifested in the spoken language also. The cause, or causes, could be the urgency that we all seem to be under, or maybe the shortcuts we take in texting, or maybe not enough butt whippings in grade school. Whatever reasons we may have, I am about to take away your excuses. Let us start with I, We and Myself. People don't seem to know the difference between the subject of a sentence and the object of a sentence. Since it is apparent that school did not help, I will provide a short and quick way to know when to use each. It is wrong to say, "Ruth and me went to a movie." It is wrong to say, "They gave Ruth and I popcorn." Just remove the other person and see how it sounds and you will easily know the difference. You would never say, "me went to a movie" or "They gave I popcorn." See how simple? Try this one: "The tickets were bought by Ruth and I." Myself should be used if it has been preceded by "I" in the sentence. e.g. "I did not enjoy the movie myself." It sounds funny to say "Feel free to email myself with any questions." By the way, e.g. and i.e. are quite often confused. When you want to show and example use e.g. which means "for example.” When you want to clarify something use i.e. which means “that is.” To compliment means to say something nice about something or someone. To complement is to complete or bring something to perfection. A nice cabernet complements a perfect steak so you should compliment the chef and sommelier for the selections. You can imply something by saying the correct words that will cause your listener to infer what you implied. Speaker implies, listener infers. Of course, actual words may not be needed as in my previous month's discussion on the Ladder of Inference. When you affect something you influence it. When you effect something you actually make it happen. "Let's get together and effect a change in government". "Our votes are supposed to have an effect in government." We all know that our votes do not affect lawmakers' decisions in any way." The whole comprises the parts, i.e. the whole includes these items. "Congress comprises senators and representatives." There really is no such thing as "being comprised of." Just say, "is composed of" or is made up of." Regardless really does not need the "ir-" in front to denote negative since the "-less" at the end already does that. I once was referred to as "the infamous Manny Roman." If you remember that President Roosevelt said "A date which will live in infamy" you will understand that it may be famous, but in a very bad way. I took it to mean that I am a famous dude and moved along knowing that most people did not know the difference anyway. A rattlesnake is venomous not poisonous. If it bites you, you are in trouble. As the old joke goes, “the doctor said you're gonna die." However, you can eat the rattlesnake since it is not poisonous. A funny one is how often the words weather, whether and wether, incorrectly appear in sentences. Weather of course is what is happening outside. You look out the window to see whether it is raining or the sun is shining. Wether is a castrated ram, which makes it no longer a ram of course. Well, enough. I have given you enough to think about. Please do not flame me. If you have any problems with this article, tear out the page, ensure that the information on the other side is not needed, and throw it away. Do not send myself a bunch of uncomplementary emails because they will not have any affect on I, e.g. me will ignore you irregardless of what your comments are comprised of, or wether you are infamous or not.
2013
