Why Silicon Valley gov'ts overreach into new projects when they're (clearly) not working
Kinfolk magazine's theory of “subtraction neglect” may explain why local pols are eager to expand their jurisdictions (adding more and more initiatives on homelessness, basic income, etc.) but have trouble backing off. Even when they're far outside their charter. Or the projects fail—miserably.
Several years ago, the scientist and author Leidy Klotz was building a bridge out of Legos with his son when he noticed that one of the bridge’s supports was longer than the other. Klotz began to search for more bricks to add to the shorter end, but his son came up with a faster, more elegant solution: simply removing a brick from the taller end.
“I wouldn’t have thought about subtracting if my son hadn’t been there,” says Klotz, a professor of engineering and architecture at the University of Virginia. It inspired him to take a closer look at what he calls subtraction neglect, the seemingly universal human tendency to favor adding over subtracting when confronted with solving a problem. In Klotz’s research, using Legos in varying configurations or grid patterns on computer screens, participants overwhelmingly chose to add things—even when subtracting would have solved the problem much more quickly and easily. Like Klotz, the idea of subtracting simply never occurred to them.
Klotz has several theories on why this might be: From a “building civilization” standpoint, adding things, like food or shelter or roads, is generally a plus. And then there’s the matter of ego. When Klotz’s subjects were asked to improve a piece of writing, they were more inclined to add an extra line or two, especially when it was their own writing they were asked to polish. “It’s like that Stephen King quote about killing your darlings,” he says. “Those are your darlings that you’ve written, or built.”
Read the whole thing here.
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.