The Scout Mindset - Julia Galef - Review

‘Hope is a good breakfast but a bad supper’

It means that when we are excessively optimistic about the success of our business, the passage of time with failures can progressively shift the perspective to the opposite end of the spectrum. An individual with soldier mindset guards his beliefs and dismisses details that don’t fit into his theories. In case he succeeds there is triumphant smirk on being right while on a failure the same person classifies the opportunity as a sour grape. Needless to say that soldiers are hard to navigate in an argument. 

A scout on the others side understands that maps are imperfect representations of reality, meaning that his belief can be wrong. However, he strives for an accurate map by being aware of limits of his understanding while cognizant of track of the regions in the map that are possibly wrong. It means always being open to change your mind with respect to new information. In scout mindset, there is no such thing as threat to beliefs, if you find something wrong then it’s a chance to improve the map. 

The above context sets up the basis of Julia Galef's first attempt of being an author, there are five parts to her book, the first one narrates the idea of scout mindset and brings in a differentiation with soldier mindset. 

Part 2 of the book covers self awareness that’s typically showcased by scout minds. An honest answer to the five questions mentioned below can through light upon which side the needle is pointing towards

• Do you tell other people when they were right
• How do you react to personal criticism
• Do you ever prove yourself wrong
• Do you take precautions to avoid fooling yourself
• Do you have any good critics

There are also a bunch of thought experiments to bring out the bias in our judgement

• Double standard test - Are you judging different people with varying standards
• Outsider test - In a tricky or perplexing situation, will your judgments be the same even when you happen to be an outsider. 

Back in 1985, Intel was getting seriously challenged by Japanese companies in terms of superior product in memory chips. Intel’s brand image was centered on being a pioneer in memory chips and a slide in their core competence against their competitors was hard hit. However, the management positioned a counterfactual argument as to how a new CEO would respond to the situation. 

A definite answer emerged from an outside in perspective, which led Intel to swiftly move towards microprocessors leaving their memory chip legacy behind. 

• Conformity test - Many times we conform to peer pressure despite evidence pointing against a specific stand. A counterfactual reasoning to test the stand on change in stance from our peers would greatly expose the conformity bias.
• Selective skeptic test - If evidence supported the other side, how credible will you judge it to be
• Status quo bias test - If the current situation was not a status quo, would you judge differently. 

The other three parts elucidate on dealing without illusions, shift in mind based on evidence and holding our identity lightly. 

For a world that's increasingly getting polarized, Julia provides a framework to correct our lens before making a judgement and being aware that a worldview is a living document which needs periodic if not frequent revisions. 

Good read !