Keeping it Simple is making us Stupid
Perhaps it’s time to relinquish our fetish for simplicity?
This is one of those posts that’ll require caveats. I can already hear folks bristling, nostrils flared. So, here we go:
- No, I’m not suggesting we complicate things
- Yes, simple is often better
Who could disagree?
And yet: simple thinking in a complex world is a recipe for disaster.
The trick here is to determine what kind of simple we’re talking about.
We need to sample notions as a sommelier might sample wine.
As I shared yesterday, there are different kinds of simplicity we might encounter. To put it (too) simply: there’s the first simplicity, and the second.
The first simplicity is the automatic answer we arrive to — quickly and instinctually. The ‘obvious’ answer (duh!); the unquestioned ‘truth’; and the apparent ‘common sense’ of the denominator. When busy, tired, stressed or pressed for time, it’s the thing we’ll rally to.
The second simplicity is what we may arrive to as a result of taking a more fractal view of reality — overlaying different perspectives at different levels of abstraction. This simplicity is elegant , without being reductive.
This second simplicity may appear very similar to the first — but it is more accurate, more encompassing of contradictions and paradox, and more likely to serve across a wider variety of situations and contexts. The loose principles and fluid heuristics it generates are thus far more reliable.
This second simplicity is closer to the quality of thinking we need to tackle the more hypercomplex transnational challenges of our times: rampant inequality, ecological collapse, and the pervasive existential alienation of modern life.
It also just makes for better decisions and better design.
This is the simplicity we need more of.
The trouble is: it can be hard to tell the difference between the first and second simplicity, for they can look very similar.
The first simplicity can be selfish, short-sighted and moronic. But that’s okay! Because simplicity is great, hey. The best.
Just scan the internet for writing advice — most everyone says we need to write using plain and simple language. Even Seth Godin — the marketing legend whose spirit and work I deeply admire — shares deep praise for straightforward and simple writing.
It’s almost as though complex writing is a kind of failure.
“Overwriting has a long tradition, particularly among academics” Seth writes. “Make it a bit more complex and wordy than it needs to be. Write run-on sentences. Apparently, complicated writing must be more true.”
Instead of getting curious and leaning into the challenge of comprehending a longer piece that attempts to describe a more complex phenomenon — we’re encouraged to tsk-tsk at the obvious ineptitude of the writer. To haughtily reject it, and rally back to what we know or ‘feel’ to be true — smug in our first simplicity.
But when we besmirch writing that is more elaborate, lengthy and apt — we encourage a kind of bland homogenisation. We lose the exquisite, apt and archaic words that season the meaning we make with new flavours — and so everything starts to read the same.
And when we eschew the complex (along with the ambiguous, the nebulous, the vague, the ineffable, and so on) in favour of the simplicity we know… we become a bit simpler ourselves. (This is not necessarily a compliment).
Our excessive devotion to simplicity is dumbing us down.
Hoho, now: you know I’m not suggesting we complicate things — simple is often better. This still needs to be encouraged.
But perhaps we can approach complex work with a more benevolent disposition.
When we encounter something we don’t understand, or find difficult to comprehend: a little humility and self-doubt might open the doors to new learning. By accepting we don’t have all the answers—and that the ‘truths’ we hold might require updating—we relate better to that which baffles us.
Alternatively, at the very least, when encountering ‘overly’ complex ideas we can simply accept that they are probably fascinating — but not our cup of tea right now. And that’s okay.
Either way, this disposition may encourage more minds to work towards their second (wiser) simplicities, so that collectively we may stave off the complete extinction of our species for a while longer yet. Cheers!
I’m on some fool quest to share 50 insights in 50 days. This is day 2. More at drjasonfox.com
