The Adaptive Dilemma Pt. 2: Scientific vs Dogmatic
Level 3: Master of Mundane
Future Guardian, The Adaptive Dilemma series is an introspective journey aimed at helping you enhance your life and increase the probability of achieving precisely what you desire for a more fulfilled existence.
If you're willing to look in the mirror, this concept can change everything for you. If not, we're here to save you five minutes of your day - you can stop reading.
Part 2 of the Adaptive Dilemma is the expiration of both a dogmatic and a scientific orientation. This distinction holds the key to understanding how you can avoid falling into a sense of victimhood and outrage, as discussed in Part 1.1
Instead, it empowers you to leverage time and randomness to your advantage. If this piques your interest, read on to discover how you can begin shaping this essential aspect of your operating system
If you somehow stumbled onto this article before going through Part 1 of the Adaptive Dilemma you can check it out here.
Dogmatic Orientation vs. Scientific Orientation
In the pursuit of understanding how to increase the probability of a more fulfilling life, it's essential to distinguish between two contrasting orientations:
Dogmatic Orientation and Scientific Orientation.
They shape the way we approach our goals and expectations, and they can significantly impact our journey towards a fulfilling life.
In our exploration of dogmatic and scientific orientations, it's important to recognize that these mindsets extend far beyond the quest for personal fulfillment. While we've discussed their implications in the context of a more fulfilling life, these orientations can be harnessed as powerful tools in diverse aspects of life.
Whether you're dealing with complex problems, making critical decisions, nurturing relationships, or pursuing a successful career. Understanding the dynamics of dogmatic and scientific orientations can profoundly impact your approach.
Dogmatic Orientation
A dogmatic orientation is an outlook that expects and often demands absolutes and certainties. It rigidly prescribes only one acceptable outcome, setting itself up for a high probability failure. Let's break down a common goal from a dogmatic orientation:
“I want to lose twenty pounds in twelve weeks - any other outcome is unacceptable”
The expectations are both rigid and arbitrary.
Dogmatic thinking operates in a black-and-white manner; a pass/fail mentality. Obviously, believing there is only one way to win in a world with infinite possibilities is a massive constraint.
Those with a dogmatic orientation are more likely to set themselves in a win or lose situation that it will likely lose.
Dogma leaves little room for ongoing improvement and focuses solely on the outcome, often disregarding the process.
Scientific Orientation
The Scientific Orientation understands and assumes that there are a wide variety of potential outcomes with different probabilities or expected values. Instead of only one acceptable outcome, we are looking to increase the probability of a favorable outcome and decrease the risk of something bad happening. Science is governed by risks and probabilities, not absolutes.
It’s the scientific method.
By using a controlled process, forming a hypothesis, isolating variables isolated, and understanding there is a wide variety of potential/expected outcomes with different probabilities - we start to gain control over our expectations and future outcomes.
The result of having a Scientific Orientation is learning. Learning leads to power over future outcomes.
In essence, one orientation is fixated on the expected outcome, while the other is dedicated to the process that produces that outcome.
Ironically, the orientation focused on the expected outcome is less likely to attain a favorable result.
Recap
Dogmatic Orientation– Working against time and randomness
Arbitrary (not enough data to suggest this is a reasonable thing to expect), still maintains rigid outcomes.
Specific, predefined things must happen.
Only pre-approved outcomes are acceptable.
Impulsive, destructive, and rigid system.
Rigidity is in the expected outcome, not the process.
Scientific Orientation– Keep time and randomness on your side
Rigor lies in the structure and process.
Variables measured and controlled.
All outcomes are conceivable and acceptable since it’s data.
Expectations seldom violated
Rational, constructive, and flexible.
Probability and risk-based.
Open to new information
Language and Orientation
One way to identify your orientation is by examining the language you use.
Is your language focused on the process, characterized by flexibility and consideration of risks and probabilities? Or does it revolve around the expected outcome, marked by absolutes and rigidity regarding the result? The subtle shift from dogmatic to scientific can be found in the following statements:
Scientific: “Making this choice gives me a higher probability of getting what I want over time.”
Dogmatic: “I’m going to make this choice and it has to work on the timeline I’ve decided.”
The latter statement is a single acceptable outcome on a rigid and predefined timeline.
What happens if it doesn’t work exactly as expected? Instead of learning from the process, all you have learned is that “it didn’t work”. This leaves you “up shit creek without a paddle”, as they say.
You’ve positioned yourself in the victim role of Karpman’s triangle.
Does a scientific orientation guarantee you don’t end up “up shit’s creek”?
No.
We can’t avoid the unexpected, which means there is always some probability things don’t go our way. A scientific orientation leaves us with lessons and a path forward; a paddle.
Remember…
Time and Randomness are undefeated
Time has always and will always pass. Nothing has ever or will ever go exactly as expected. Since the two seem to be immutable, we account for them.
A scientific orientation keeps both forces, time and randomness, on your side. It turns them into your best friend working for you instead of against you.
A dogmatic orientation pits you against them. The more dogmatic, the greater enemy you make of time and randomness. And since they remain undefeated we think there is a high probability they will continue to go go undefeated …
…there we have the highest probability of winning if we keep the on our side.
For deeper dive into the Adaptive Dilemma, Part Two, you can listen to the audio or watch the video below:
Listen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify
Watch: YouTube
Live to Learn. Give to earn.
Guardian Academy
