PO (Lateral Thinking)
PO is a linguistic device in lateral thinking that frees one to make any statement without justification, shifting focus from meaning to the effect of the statement as a stimulus for new ideas.
THE IDEA
Summary
One function of PO is to allow a statement to serve as a provocation without first justifying it. PO allows one to arrange information in any way whatsoever. There need be no justification at all for such arrangement except PO.
Po two and two make five. Po water flows uphill if it is coloured green. Po lateral thinking is a waste of time. Po men have souls and women have not. Po it takes a lifetime to unlearn what has been learned in education.
The first function of PO is to shift attention from the meaning of a statement and the reason for making it to the effect of the statement. With PO one looks forwards instead of backwards. Because any arrangement of information can lead on to other arrangements a statement can be very useful as a stimulus no matter how nonsensical it is in itself. And by being nonsensical one can arrange information in a way that is different from the established patterns — and so increase the chance of a permanent restructuring. With vertical thinking one is not allowed to do any of this. With vertical thinking one looks backwards at the reason for a statement at the justification, at the meaning.
The statement, ‘Po water flows uphill if it is coloured green’ is ridiculous but it could lead on to such ideas as: Why should the green colour make a difference? Why should adding colour make a difference? Is there anything one could add to water to make it flow uphill? In fact there is. If one adds a very small amount of a special plastic then the water acts as a solid/liquid to such an extent that if you start pouring water out of a jug and then hold the jug upright the water will continue to siphon out, climbing up the side of the jug, flowing over the rim and down the outer side.
PO as a device allows one to use information in this way which is completely different from the ordinary use of information. One could use information in this way without PO but one would still be using the lateral concept which is incorporated in PO. The convenience of PO as an actual language device is that it clearly indicates that information is being used in this special way. Without such an indication there would be confusion as the listener would not know what was going on. A PO type statement inserted into an ordinary vertical thinking discussion without the use of PO would lead the listeners to suppose that the speaker was mad, lying, mistaken, stupid, ignorant or facetious. Apart from the inconvenience of being the recipient of such judgements there is the danger of being taken seriously. For instance, ‘Po the house is on fire’ is rather different from ‘The house is on fire’. Furthermore if one does not use PO then the information is not used as a stimulus in the lateral manner.
When to use it
Brainstorming sessions where conventional ideas are stuck and you need to break patterns.
Problem-solving when you need to challenge assumptions and explore radical alternatives.
Creative writing to generate unexpected plot twists or metaphors.
Education to help students think beyond established frameworks and encourage curiosity.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Nonsensical Statements as Stimuli
Statements like 'Po two and two make five' or 'Po water flows uphill if it is coloured green' are deliberately absurd, but they provoke new ways of thinking by shifting attention from truth to potential outcomes.
Water Uphill Insight
De Bono uses 'Po water flows uphill if it is coloured green' to prompt questions about what an additive could make water do. He describes a special plastic that changes how water flows from a jug. The example illustrates a route from an absurd statement to a useful question, rather than documenting the invention of the material.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How might using PO change your approach to a problem you currently face?
Can you think of a time when a seemingly absurd statement led to a valuable new insight?
What is the difference between using PO in a discussion and making an ordinary factual statement?
Often confused with
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Lateral Thinking A Textbook of Creativity (Edward de Bono)