Lateral Thinking vs Vertical Thinking

With vertical thinking one has to be correct at every step, with lateral thinking one does not have to be

The very essence of vertical thinking is that one must be right at each step. This is absolutely fundamental to the nature of vertical thinking. Logical thinking and mathematics would not function at all without this necessity. In lateral thinking, however, one does not have to be right at each step provided the conclusion is right. It is like building a bridge. The parts do not have to be self-supporting at every stage, but when the last part is fitted into place the bridge suddenly becomes self-supporting.

[Diagram illustrating the concept]

There are times when it may be necessary to be wrong in order to be right at the end. This can happen when one is judged wrong according to the current frame of reference and then is found to be right when the frame of reference itself gets changed. Even if the frame of reference is not changed it may still be useful to go through a wrong area in order to reach a position from which the right pathway can be seen.

[Diagram showing pathway through wrong area]

With vertical thinking one uses the negative in order to block off certain pathways. With lateral thinking there is no negative

Vertical thinking uses negation to eliminate what does not fit the current framework, blocking off pathways that lead away from the accepted solution. Lateral thinking, in contrast, does not employ the negative in this way; it remains open to all paths, even those that initially appear wrong, because they may later connect to a valid conclusion once the frame of reference shifts.

With vertical thinking one concentrates and excludes what is irrelevant, with lateral thinking one welcomes chance intrusions

Vertical thinking is selection by exclusion. One works within a frame of reference and throws out what is not relevant. With lateral thinking one realizes that a pattern cannot be restructured from within itself but only as the result of some outside influence. So one welcomes outside influences for their provocative action. The more irrelevant such influences are, the more chance there is of altering the established pattern. To look only for things that are relevant means perpetuating the current pattern.

With vertical thinking categories, classifications and labels are fixed, with lateral thinking they are not

With vertical thinking, categories, classifications and labels are useful only if they are consistent, for vertical thinking depends on identifying something as a member of some class or excluding it from that class. If something is given a label or put into a class it is supposed to stay there. With lateral thinking labels may change as something is looked at now in one way and now in another. Classifications and categories are not fixed pigeonholes to aid identification but signposts to help movement. In lateral thinking, labels are not permanently attached but are used for temporary convenience. Vertical thinking depends heavily on the rigidity of definitions just as mathematics does on the unalterable meaning of a symbol once this has been allocated. Just as a sudden change of meaning is the basis of humour, so an equal fluidity of meaning is useful for the stimulation of lateral thinking.