On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 12:29:28 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> Hmm. Prefer being a realist.

Go for it.

I find that using the approach of "what would be the ideal place to be" 
as a starting point works quite well.  Then what you do is you apply 
realism to that ideal position and come up with something that's as close 
to the ideal solution as you can.

Starting from a "realist" position means that you start with a suboptimal 
solution, and then you whittle down from that (who ever starts with a 
"realistic" solution and then says "hey, we could actually go a bit 
further than this"?

IOW, starting with a "realist" position limits one's thinking to a lower 
bar, and there's a very small chance of trying something with a slightly 
*higher* bar because one limits oneself to the thinking that "that'd 
never fly".

So I prefer starting out with the ideal solution, but with the 
understanding that the ideal solution is never going to be implemented 
and there will be some compromise.  I find I tend to come up with better 
solutions that way.

Jim

Post a reply to this message