Approaches to problem solving

[trenton]

I would like to rethink my entire approach to problem solving because there are probably better ways to solve my problems. I am curious about the approaches other people use to solve problems and I hope that we can come up with better methods.I have been dealing with a lot of problems in various forms (to which you can probably relate.)

The problems I am most successful with are chess problems. I approach these problems through a combination of intuition and rational analysis. I find weaknesses in my opponent's moves, exploit them, and win the game. I combine this with constant study and computer analysis with the goal of improvement. This may play to my strengths as someone with autism given how My brain is wired. This is how I defeated a grandmaster for example.

My meta problem is that I approach my problems in life as if they were chess problems because I am good at solving in that way. There is a problem with this approach to problem solving. First of all, chess is a game with perfect information. Given perfect information, one can reliably predict the result of a move, but even then one's reasoning can be flawed leading to mistakes. Many of life's problems come with imperfect information. Rational analysis is therefore even more unreliable and is prone to even more mistakes.

Furthermore, I often try to think my problems through and come up with a solution. This leads to rumination, causing me to feel trapped and lost. It becomes torture. I analyze my past and present situations again and again only making me even more frustrated. I can't find solutions to my problems by thinking about them, but I still cling to the hope that a solution exists. This causes me to not give up, repeating the cycle.

One approach to moral problems seems to be a good for me. I can take a set of relevant principles, weigh their application to a moral dilemma, and then come to a conclusion through analysis. It becomes possible to build up interesting moral positions through this approach. It is kind of like applying the principles of a chess game to guide you to a good move. This could be a principle such as countering a flank attack with a central expansion. I seemed to be very good at moral and academic philosophy when I took a course back in college.

I seem to be terrible at managing relationship problems. First of all, my theories fall apart quickly when trying to manage a situation with other people. My conclusion is now that there are no consistent principles to be applied because people react to and interpret your behaviors and intentions in different ways. Each person is unique and requires a unique approach to build any kind of relationship with them. In most cases I have a hard time understanding situations and other people, leading me to be taken advantage of and making mistakes. I often see it as hopeless to communicate my feelings because they can either be rejected or invalidated or completely ignored with no hope of change. Most people are disinterested in deep intellectual work, so I am easily bored with shallow people. These situations are a common weakness for people with autism and obviously rational analysis doesn't help unless I'm trying to predict how someone else will respond and adjust my behavior accordingly to make a calculated move which will probably be bad anyway. It makes it look like my values don't matter a damn and there is nothing I can do about it.

In general I hold self education as the key to solving most of life problems. Self education is the key to constant self improvement similar to teaching myself chess to get better. My hope is that I will discover a new idea that will solve my problems. Unfortunately, even this doesn't seem to be enough sometimes.

Another kind of problem I dealt with is past trauma. Forgiveness seems to be helpful for this. I tried therapy with limited success. I tried reading several books on emotional mastery with partial success. At the end of all of it I was still depressed and still had thoughts that I would be better off dead. At least I don't need to invent stories about why incest is fine anymore, so that's a plus.

Apparently, good relationships are key to solving trauma because they reinforce the belief that you deserve to be loved. ever since the incident from when I was six, I have been struggling with self worth. I have been trying to love myself, but I can't do it. I have been trying to re establish my self worth through accomplishments in career and chess success. (Chess can improve a person's self esteem if they are good at it.) However, I feel trapped at my job at Kroger and I struggle to build a career that uses my strengths. I have tried career coaching and life coaching. I have been given conflicting advice with one saying don't give up on chess and the other saying chess is not a viable career. The opportunities are too rare, and I would be better off joining a think tank. I might need to go back to college.

The problem with trying to solve a problem of self worth through accomplishments is that the proof may never be enough. I have earned a hero bonus for working during the COVID pandemic, I helped an abandoned three year old girl, I helped a victim of predatory loaning, I became a chess teacher, I won several chess tournaments, and I helped my suicidal brother. I still don't love myself. Maybe in reality my actions are not proof of my self worth. According to chat GPT my worth and value as a human being is intrinsic. Unfortunately, I think that value is extrinsic and leads me to feelings of nihilism. How do you prove intrinsic value?

What are your approaches to problem solving?

[trenton]

If I were being as rational as possible in terms of my career problems,  this is what I would think.

According to Cal Newport, following your passion is a bad idea. It can cause you to end up on food stamps. If I pursue chess by moving to New York to get the job, I will struggle to afford housing. Even then, I will put myself through a lot of suffering to try to become a grandmaster. I wasn't given a chess coach at a young age, so realistically this career path will not work.

It is not a problem of my abilities, but rather a problem of circumstances. These circumstances happen because chess is a game and does not provide enough value to the world. The reason I didn't give up is because I believe I am supposed to overcome these circumstances and achieve my dream anyway. This is idealistic and will force me to tie myself in knots.

As it stands my career options are limited because I only have an associate degree. I will have to go back to college to expand my options. Other career paths could include joining a think tank to inform public policy or becoming a mental health educator.

One reason I have been sticking with this path I'm on is because I don't like the solution. If I want what is best for me, then I might have to do something I don't like. I don't know how I'm supposed to be happy in that case, hence I become lost and confused. But rationally I should stop trying to organize my life in such a way as to become a professional chess player.

[bebotalk]

As a general rule, it's about analysing the problem, solving it, and getting points to resolve it. 

 

 

[trenton]

37 minutes ago, bebotalk said:

As a general rule, it's about analysing the problem, solving it, and getting points to resolve it. 

What does "getting points to resolve it" mean?

[bebotalk]

1 hour ago, trenton said:

What does "getting points to resolve it" mean?

What I meant was taking steps to resolve the defined problem.

Say a person has an ant problem in their garden.

They'd see where the ants are coming from. 

Or remove plants that attract ants.

Or move any precious plants to a place where ants can't get to them.

Or find a way to exterminate the ants, if needs be. 

Once a problem is defined, it's about taking as many steps as possible to resolve it or at least mitigate it.