Descriptive Precision in Lateral Thinking
In a lateral thinking exercise, a description of a figure must give someone enough detail to draw it. Simply saying what it reminds you of is insufficient. Three valid methods are building from smaller units, comparing it to another figure, and modifying another figure.
THE IDEA
Comment
Some difficulty arises when the presented shape is compared to an actual object like 'a carpenter’s angle'. The difficulty is that this sort of description opens up an unlimited range of descriptions, for instance another description might describe the shape as a building looked at from the air. The point to keep very clearly in mind is that one is asked for an alternative description of the presented figure, one is not asking what the figure could be or what it reminds you of. The description must be such that someone could actually draw the figure from the description. Thus the suggestion that the figure looks like a building seen from the air is useless unless the building is specified as L-shaped in which case the description is L-shaped. One need not insist that the description be very exact, for instance the 'two rectangles placed one against the other' ought really to contain an indication of the orientation but one must not be pedantic because it misplaces the emphasis.
Some of the descriptions may indicate a particular process. Such descriptions as 'two rectangles placed one against the other' or 'a large rectangle with a smaller rectangle missing' actually require that one consider some other figure and then subtract or modify. Clearly this is a valid method of description. The basic types of description might be regarded as:
- Building up from smaller units.
- Comparing to another figure.
- Modifying another figure by addition or subtraction.
As before one may have to draw additional diagrams to show what is meant If one cannot understand oneself what the student means then he is asked to explain it himself.
When to use it
Teaching problem-solving techniques that require precise communication.
Designing instructions for drawing or building objects.
Improving clarity in technical writing and documentation.
Facilitating lateral thinking workshops where participants must describe abstract shapes.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Poor Description
Describing a figure as 'a building seen from the air' is too vague and does not enable someone to draw it unless the building is specified as L-shaped.
Good Description
Describing the figure as 'two rectangles placed one against the other' provides a clear basis for drawing, though orientation might be needed.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How can you describe a shape you see so that someone else can draw it exactly?
Why is it important to avoid describing what a figure reminds you of in a lateral thinking exercise?
What types of description are most effective for conveying a shape's structure?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Lateral Thinking A Textbook of Creativity (Edward de Bono)