This has to be said so often that it’s worth its own post. In fact, you were probably nudged here from another post as a reminder. Most importantly:
In discovering the DNA helix, James Watson and Francis Crick relied on a pile of toys. Despite having an x-ray photograph of DNA taken by Rosalind Franklin in the 1950s, to make the breakthrough that has so radically changed our world they needed help. They played for several days with, “a chemist’s equivalent of a child’s Tinkertoy set,” and, thorough their work with this wooden approximation, what was unclear became clear. They had the crucial insight that DNA was a two-stranded molecule twisted into a helix.
Distinctions and models are fingers pointing towards reality, and a way to seek out truth in reality. The useful question to ask of a model is not, “is it true” but rather, “what can I see now that I couldn’t see before – just by asking if it was true?”
A model only has to be good enough to get us to the next model.
Are people really just introverts or extroverts? Of course not. There is a spectrum of experience that itself changes for individuals over time, sometimes based on alcohol intake. But knowing that an experience different from your own exists offers the chance to take a closer look at those around you. Maybe you, or someone you know, could use a quiet break to collect their thoughts. Or a wild crayon-on-wall brainstorm and a Archimedes-style naked run down the street. Or perhaps when your friend wants to head home early after the first two parties of the night it’s not a reflection on how they feel about you.
But taking the distinction literally can also limit what we can see. If someone is “just” anything (just another liberal, conservative, extrovert, or Enneatype 3) our vision narrows yet again and the opportunity is lost to see more of people, the world, and future possibilities as they vanish behind the cardboard sign we’ve put in front of them.
Models help us to zoom in for a moment on that dot on the horizon that we hadn’t noticed, to reveal that it’s actually fresh water. But if we get fixated on it we’ll trip over the goat in front of us.
What becomes visible by trying on a model or distinction for size? Where have our existing models become limiting and ready to be questioned? How can we stay open, curious, and inquiring into the ever changing truth of what is here now?
PS
One final note: metaphor matters. I’ll caution more about the self persuasive power – and potential lion’s jaws – of metaphor and frame in a future post.
References
Palca, J. (2023, February 28). 70 years ago, a scientific discovery changed the world. NPR All Things Considered. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://www.npr.org/2023/02/28/1160157729/70-years-ago-a-scientific-discovery-changed-the-world
Chang, A., Kelly M.L. (2023, March 1). Correction: Rosalind Franklin’s crucial contribution to the discovery of DNA’s structure. NPR: All Things Considered. https://www.npr.org/2023/03/01/1160457184/correction-rosalind-franklins-crucial-contribution-to-the-discovery-of-dnas-stru
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, March 1). Archimedes. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes
Hirshfeld, A. (n.d.). Archimedes: The Original Naked Scientist. Science Features | Naked Scientists. https://www.thenakedscientists.com/articles/science-features/archimedes-original-naked-scientist
