Selection of disciplines

Suppose the role for description has been chosen. Where should descriptions of objects of attention (interests) of the role actually be taken from?

The first way is to Google/search or ask ChatGPT. This way, you can quickly obtain initial information. However, the accuracy of the information obtained through this method may be quite low: both ChatGPT and search results often provide general information on the topic. It may be sufficient to learn to distinguish between a doctor and a lawyer (for those who don't know), but more specialized information needs to be extracted and actively verified. For example, finding quality information on the responsibilities of a leader can be quite challenging. Most likely, you will come across texts by copywriters or phrases like "a leader is someone who leads." Such information is unlikely to be successfully used in a project.

The second way is lengthier but more precise. You can first try to identify the role using your existing knowledge or virtual assistants/search engines. Then, you can refer to the discipline that describes the conceptual language of the role.

A discipline represents accumulated problem-solving experience expressed in theories and models. For example, the discipline of "leadership" describes what the role of a leader entails, what problems it solves, what methods it uses, and what a leader should be interested in. The discipline describes important objects for the role and gives them names - this is how concepts are derived, which can then be conveniently used in activities. For instance, a leader's object of attention may be "team collaboration," and the discipline describes the methods for ensuring this collaboration. Thus, the discipline literally describes a certain norm: how one should view the world (what "lenses" to wear) to achieve the set goal using the chosen role and how not to view the world from the role. For example, an engineer may be less concerned about the "deadline" to implement a feature in a product, while an operations manager will closely monitor this object of attention.

Write a post where you describe your key roles (at work, in life). In what disciplines are the objects of attention for these roles described?

Disciplines are described in textbooks, articles, courses. For instance, the discipline of "focus" is described in the book "Modeling and Focus" - but it may also be described in other textbooks. In particular, applied focus practices are described in books like "Jedi Techniques" by Maxim Dorofeev, "The Checklist" by Atul Gawande, and many others.

Disciplines, like models, can be considered at different levels:

1. Applied discipline, which focuses a lot of attention on individual objects (very finely sliced) and examines operations with them in detail. The meta-model from an applied discipline is taken to create a model in a specific situation, which is very useful for examining "specifics";
2. Medium-level discipline, which provides a larger slice of objects. A meta-meta-model is taken from the medium-level discipline, making it convenient to have some understanding of the situation "as a whole";
3. Fundamental discipline, which provides objects in the largest slices. Meta-meta-meta-models are taken from fundamental disciplines, making it convenient to consider classes of situations. Additionally, fundamental disciplines establish "first principles" that can be used to test less abstract models from medium-level and applied disciplines.

For example, in applied focus, specific applied questions are addressed, such as how to stay focused when creating a work product or how to consistently produce work products of high quality using checklists.

In medium-level focus discipline, the most important concepts for solving the majority of problems are described - detailing how the brain's functions and attention management mechanisms influence how we communicate and perform tasks. This medium-level discipline is more extensively covered in this course/textbook.

Finally, in fundamental focus discipline, much attention is given to the "first principles" of focus - violating which at the applied and medium levels can lead to undesirable consequences. For example, if you do not use the exocortex for attention management or use it unconsciously, you may have problems with task prioritization: you may often jump into working on "new inputs" instead of evaluating if these inputs should be included in the upcoming work plan. As a result, both short-term and long-term focus on important tasks can be disrupted. Or, if the principle of "giving priority to the physical world" is violated in modeling, there is a risk of building a pleasant but unrealistic model (for example, "implementing a new sales script now will immediately double the number of sales"), and then being disappointed when something else happens in the physical world.

The choice of the appropriate level of discipline for consideration is usually made by first selecting an applied discipline to solve a specific task. For example, if the goal is to create a checklist practice for daily work planning, one would refer to the applied focus discipline and search for information on "checklists." Or if a one-on-one meeting with an employee needs to be held to discuss their work quality and determine areas for development, then sources of information describing how to conduct one-on-one meetings would be selected from the discipline of applied leadership.

In the workplace, mastery of a role is often nurtured through reference to applied disciplines. However, there comes a point where growth reaches its limits: it turns out that an individual has a set of practices, techniques, or life hacks that help with simple tasks, but they are unable to progress further. There is no breakthrough in thinking, it is difficult to form an understanding of the situation "as a whole" and build a more complex model. For example, a leader knows how to conduct one-on-one meetings, but communication within the team as a whole is lacking for an unclear reason. This is the moment to stop, analyze the reasons, sort them by importance. This is when medium-level disciplines are referred to. For example, to study what is encompassed in leadership discipline as a whole, what a leader should be doing, what common mistakes occur when establishing communication in teams, and so on.

Proficiency in fundamental disciplines allows complex, non-standard problems to be solved, for which there is no accumulated experience in medium and applied level disciplines. In such cases, the "first principles" can be applied and solutions can be developed from scratch, similar to how Elon Musk operates. Additionally, mastery of fundamental disciplines saves effort when dealing with more straightforward problems. For instance, you can consciously decide to stop thinking about a certain subject for a period - but you know that you cannot completely ignore it since you are aware of the interim gap and the fact that those who choose to increase the precision of actions and thoughts tend to win in the long run over those who perform many unnecessary actions swiftly.

Fundamental disciplines are usually studied at universities, and then they are more often "referred to." Overall, one can achieve a certain professional success without in-depth fundamental knowledge - but addressing problems at the forefront becomes challenging. At the forefront, there are no ready-made recipes, often not even analogs, and solutions must be constructed like a builder from the most basic building blocks. Without a solid "foundation," it becomes extremely difficult.